NBSIR 80-2201

Coordinated Measurement

Services at the National Bureau

of Standards

Authors:

Brian C. Belanger

David E. Edaerly

Albert 0. Tholen

(Introduction by Arthur 0. McCoubrev)

Directorate of Measurement Services

National Measurement Laboratory

National Bureau of Standards

U.S. Department of Commerce

Washington, D C. 20234

October 1 930

issued December 1380

I

| Prepared f or: National Bureau ot Standards

| U.S. Department of Commerce

j Washington, D C. 2023^-

[

I
IJ I1Ia
NBSIR 80-2201

COORDINATED MEASUREMENT

SERVICES AT THE NATIONAL BUREAU

OF STANDARDS

Authors:

Brian C. Belanger

David E. Edgerly

Albert D. Tholen

(Introduction by Arthur 0. McCoubrey)

Directorate of Measurement Services

National Measurement Laboratory

National Bureau of Standards

U.S. Department of Commerce

Washington, D.C. 20234

October 1980

Issued December 1980

Prepared for: National Bureau of Standards

U.S. Department of Commerce

Washington, D.C. 20234

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Philip M. Klutznick, Secretary

Jordan J. Baruch, Assistant Secretary for Productivity, Technology, and innovation

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS. Ernest Ambler, Director
IIIIIIJJI1I1Iiiii3a
Coordinated Measurement Services at the

National Bureau of Standards

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction iv

Office of Weights and Measures

Introduction 1 Problem on National Level 1 NBS Responsibility 1 OWM Mission 3

Interactions 4

Program Activity 6

Major Objectives 6 Technical Activities 6

Railroad Track Scale Calibration Program 6

Education Programs 7 Study of State Needs 7 Automating Preparation of Handbooks 7 State Laboratory Programs 8

Type Approval 8

Impact of New Technology 8

Critical Issues 8

Activity Summary 9

Sponsored Conferences/Supported Conferences 9

Invited Talks 10

OWM Publications - FY 1 980 12

Seminars - FY 1 980 1 3 Training Schools 14

Technical and Professional Committee Participation

and Leadership 15

Consulting and Advisory Centers 17

Office of Measurement Services

Introduction - Mission, Functions, and Interactions 18

Program Activity - Calibration and Measurement Services ...20

MAP Program Development 21 Policy and Planning 21 Statistical Consulting (Center for Applied Math) 21 Electrical Measurements (Center for Absolute

Physical Quantities) 22

Temperature Measurements (Center for Absolute

Physical Quantities) 23

Spectrophotometry Measurements (Center for

Radiation Research) 26

Microwave Power 28

X-Ray Radiation Exposure to 150 KeV (Center

for Radiation Research) 29

Force Measurements (Center for Mechanical

Engineering and Process Technology) 29

i
PMTE Project 32

Background 32

Objectives 32

Actions 33

Capabilities Catalog 33

Newsletter 33

Cost Effectiveness Studies 34

Automatic Test Equipment (ATE) Activities 35

Training 36

Standardization of Calibration Procedures 36

Standard Terms and Definitions 37

Other Activities 37

Plans for FY 81 39

Other OMS Activities 41

Office of Domestic and International Measurement Standards

Introduction 46

Background 46

ODIMS Mission 46

Interactions 46

Program Activity 47

Major Objectives 47

Technical Activities 47

United States Participation in OIML 47

Coordinating NML Involvement in Domestic and

International Voluntary Standards Activities ....49

Supporting Bilateral and Multilateral Scientific

and Technological Programs for NML Cooperation

with Foreign Institutions 50

Highlights for FY 80 51 U.S.A. Participation in OIML 51 Sixth International Conference of Legal

Metrology 51 USA Initiative on Electronics 52

Approved Work Plans for OIML PS17 - "Measurement of Pollution" and for PS20 - "Prepackaged Products" 53

Draft OIML International Recommendations

Reviewed by the United States During FY 80 54

OIML Meetings Attended by United States

Delegations During FY 80 55
-p^

co

rv>

Coordinating NML Involvement in Domestic and

International Voluntary Standards Activities 56

0MB Circular A-ll 9 "Federal Participation in

Voluntary Standards" and Proposed Procedures

for Listing Voluntary Standards Bodies 56

NML Policy on High-Impact Standards Issues 57

American National Standards Institute

Service Fee System 57

Supporting Bilateral and Multilateral Scientific

and Technological Programs for NML Cooperation

with Foreign Institutions 58

U.S./Yugoslav Cooperative S&T Agreement 58

NBS Special Foreign Currency Program (SFCP)

Projects in Egypt 58

Technical Assistance Programs 58

Meetings in Support of Bilateral Science

and Technology Agreements 59

Meetings in Support of Technical Assistance

Programs 59

Special Publications 59

Invited Talks 59

APPENDICES

1. DRAFT PLAN FOR TRAINING AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS IN 1.1

MEASUREMENT SCIENCE (August 29, 1980)

PMTE Project Background . ,. 2.1

PMTE UPDATE (December 1979 and June 1980) 3.1

COST EFFECTIVENESS STUDY TO DETERMINE ALTERNATIVES 4,1

TO OUT OF SERVICE CALIBRATION OF PMTE WITHIN THE

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT (August 12, 1980)

5. COST EFFECTIVENESS STUDY TO DETERMINE METHODS FOR 5.1

OPTIMIZING CALIBRATION INTERVALS FOR PMTE WITHIN THE

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT (August 12, 1980)

6. 0MB Circular--Federal Participation in Voluntary gj

Standards (January 17, 1980)

7. Federal Register Notice (June 2, 1980) 7.1

Implementation of Federal Voluntary Standards Policy;

Proposed Procedures for Listing Voluntary Standards

Bodies Eligible for Federal Agency Support and Participation,

and for a Department Sponsored Voluntary Dispute Resolution

Service for Procedural Complaints Against Listed Voluntary

Standards Bodies

i i i
Coordinated Measurement Services

at the

National Bureau of Standards

Introducti on

The realization of accuracy for measurements made throughout the

United States requires traceability to national reference standards

which are maintained by the National Bureau of Standards (NBS). The

services of NBS which are necessary for traceability, broadly classified

as measurement services , are generated in the scientific and technical

Centers of the National Measurement Laboratory (NML) and the National

Engineering Laboratory (NEL) , the major operating units of NBS having

measurement related assignments. NBS measurement services flow from

their many internal sources outward to meet the needs of users widely

distributed throughout the nation. Special program offices within NML

function to coordinate these services and to provide responsive points

of contact for those who need them. Functions of these offices include

calibrations, services for the assurance of measurement quality, measurement practice publications, assistance to external institutions in the

training and education of metro logists and the promotion of good measurement system operations throughout the United States. These coordinating offices are"':

• Office of Weights and Measures (OWM) - responsible for the measurement service requirements of state and local government agencies.

^Additional NML measurement service program offices discussed elsewhere are

• Office of Standard Reference Materials

• Office of Standard Reference Data

i v
• Office of Measurement Services (OMS) - responsible for the measurement service requirements of private industry and other agencies

of the Federal Government.

The programs of NML also include, in addition to measurement reference

standards and related measurement services, the participation of many professional staff members in the work of voluntary standards writing committees, the development of international standards for legal measurement

practice, and international cooperative research. The objectives of these

activities are to promote the incorporation of good measurement practice

into domestic voluntary standards for products and methods, the incorporation of United States practices in international voluntary and legal

measurement standards and domestic benefits from measurement related

research in other nations. The coordination of all of these activities

2 within NML is the responsibility of the following:

• Office of Domestic and International Measurements Standards (ODIMS) -

responsible for oversight and coordination of NML participation in

domestic and international voluntary standards development, international standards of legal measurement practice, and research

cooperation with foreign institutions.

The coordinating activities of OWM, OMS, and ODIMS are integrated

together through close association of all programs within the Directorate

for Measurement Services (DMS). The following pages of this document

describe the activities, objectives, and plans for each of these three

2The coordination of domestic standards activities in NEL is the responsibility

of the Office of Engineering Standards.

v
offices in detail. This information was prepared for the DMS Evaluation

Panel of the National Academy of Sciences /.National Academy of Engineering.

It is published here with the hope that it will also be useful to a wider

interested readership.

i

vi
Office of Weights and Measures

Technical Activities

1 . Introduction

1.1. Problem on National Level

Although the Constitution empowers Congress to fix the standards

of weights and measures, the United States is unique among the nations

of the world in that no compliance method for controlling weights and

measures is exercised at the national level. The only basic actions of

the Federal Government in this field have been the Mint Act of 1828

establishing early standards and an act of 1866 legalizing the metric

system of measurement in this country. Many courts, both State and

Federal, have ruled that as long as Congress does not exercise its power

in this area, the rights of the individual States are not diminished.

Thus, the regulation of weights and measures in commerce and industry

has been left largely to the States and their political subdivisions to

admi ni ster.

More than 775 separate jurisdictions exist in this country including

States, countries, and cities. It is the responsibility of the State

and local officials to see that equity prevails in all commercial

transactions

.

1.2. MBS Responsibility

The task of monitoring our national standards remained in the

Treasury Department throughout the nineteenth century under the direct

supervision of a small office known as the Office of Standard Weights

and Measures. In 1901 Congress renamed this small office the National

Bureau of Standards and greatly increased its functions and activities.

The functions of NBS that are directly related to weights and measures

fall into three categories: (1) the custody of the standards, (2) the

metrological services, and (3) the advisory services to the States and

industry. The Bureau provides the States calibration services that

result in precise values for their basic reference standards of mass,

length, and capacity.

Since NBS has no enforcement authority in the weights and measures

area, it consequently, plays a unique role in weights and measures

administration. The primary goal of the States is enforcement while

the primary goal of NBS is to provide technical services to the States

necessary to bring about nationwide uniformity in weights and measures

enforcement. The Bureau provides this technical service to the States

through its Office of Weights and Measures. This service is all the more

important today considering the revolution in technology taking place.

For example, weights and measures officials are being faced with certifying the accuracy of scales tied to laser product code scanners and

price computers or of digital readout gasoline pumps with microprocessor

interfacing. The Office of Weights and Measures must provide technical

1
leadership in these areas. Uniform testing equipment and procedures

must be developed, model legal requirements provided, and a training

program carried on with the guidance of the National Bureau of Standards.

Under our system of State and local enforcement of weights and

measures laws and regulations, it would seem that nonuniformity would

be inevitable. Such is not the case largely due to the program of cooperation with the States carried on by NBS through the Office of Weights

and Measures. Most notably, OWM sponsors the National Conference on Weights and Measures, a voluntary organization of Federal, State, and

local officials and has annually conducted this national forum since

1905. This office, through the National Conference on Weights and

Measures, plans and conducts a program of assistance to State and

local weights and measures officials, business, and industry in the

many phases of weights and measures supervision. The range of services

provided includes drafting of new legislation, interpretation of laws,

development of specifications, tolerances, and testing methods; and the

design of testing equipment.

In the Directorate for Measurement Services today, there is great

potential for synergism as a result of the combined efforts of the Office

of Weights and Measures with the Office of Measurement Services and the

Office of Domestic and International Measurement Standards. For example,

the National Conference on Weights and Measures will influence and be

influenced by the International Organization of Weights and Measures in

many aspects of U.S. legal metrology. In addition, the National Conference

of Standards Laboratories will be called upon increasingly (as was the

National Conference on Weights and Measures in the past) to serve as a forum for State metrology laboratories serving their industries. Weights

and measures has a long history and a bright future.

2
1.3. OWM Mission

The State Weights and Measures Program provides technical services

to ensure accurate and equitable commercial transactions involving quantity measurements and standard weights and measures regulations, procedures, and associated devices used in the 50 States. The Organic Act of

the National Bureau of Standards (15USC271) specifically authorizes:

• the testing, calibration, and certification of standards

and standard measuring apparatus;

• the study and improvement of instruments and methods of measurements;

• the investigation and testing of railroad track scales, elevator

scales, and other scales used in weighing commodities for

interstate shipment;

• cooperation with the States in securing uniformity in weights

and measures laws and methods of inspection;

• the preparation and distribution of standard samples such as those used in checking chemical analyses, temperature, color,

viscosity, heat of combustion, and other basic properties of

materials; also the preparation and sale or other distribution

of standard instruments, apparatus, and materials for calibration

of measuring equipment.

The major functions of the office are delineated on the organization

chart:

(1) National Conference and Training. The Office of Weights and

Measures (OWM) sponsors the National Conference on Weights and Measures

(NCWM), a voluntary organization of weights and measures officials who

meet annually to study and resolve weights and measures issues. The

keys to the weights and measures system in the U.S. are cooperation and

communication. Thus, a major part of this function is the facilitation

of communication and information among the individual regulatory jurisdictions and NBS. The Metric Conversion Act of 1975 specifically requests

the Secretary of Commerce to work with the NCWM to "assure that State

and local weights and measures officials are (i) appropriately involved

in metric conversion activities and (ii) assisted in their efforts to

bring about timely amendments to weights and measures laws..."

A training program and numerous publications for the NCWM membership are important parts of this program.

One of the most important methods of achieving uniformity in weights

and measures is to develop, under the auspices of the NCWM, standardized

or "model" regulations with the jurisdictions that must enforce such

regulations and industries and the publ ic affected by such regulations.

States can then voluntarily adopt such models for their own use and have

confidence that such regulations represent concensus standards and will

not interfere with interstate commerce. These model regulations are studied and updated or added to annually by the NCWM.

3
(2) Technical Services for States. Major outputs of the NCWM are Handbook 44 "Specifications, Tolerances and Other Technical Requirements

for Commercial Weighing and Measuring Devices"; Handbook 112 "Examination

Procedure Outlines for Commercial Weighing and Measuring Devices", and

other technical handbooks, memoranda, and procedures. These publications

are updated annually by the NCWM with technical advice from OWM. NBS

publishes these documents for the NCWM. OWM provides interpretations

and other consultation on them and the devices to which they pertain on

a daily basis. OWM also provides evaluations, on a cost recovery basis,

of new device designs with respect to the performance standards contained

in Handbook 44. Test procedures and techniques are developed for such

devices through this program.

(3) Technology Transfer. The OWM provides long range program

development to identify projected technology needs of the state and

local governments and to plan for satisfying of those needs in a timely

manner. This technology transfer derives to a large extent from research

programs in the NBS centers (see "Interactions"). A technological

revolution is now taking place. High speed dynamic measurements using

microprocessor control and other sophisticated electronic component

systems are becoming common in the marketplace. State weights and

measures officials are being faced with certifying the accuracy of

scales tied to laser product code scanners and price computers, grain

moisture measurement devices, digital readout gasoline pumps, all of

which may or may not be el ectromagneti cally or otherwise compatible with

their environments.

(4) State Traceability Service. In 1966, Congress appropriated

funds to equip the 50 States, D.C., Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands

with artifact standards and equipment for mass length and volume measurements in U.S. customary and metric units. This program was completed

October 1978. An integral part of that program is the continuing technical

support provided by OWM in the maintenance and upgrading of State metrologists

competence through seminars, workshops, correspondence programs, handbooks

and daily responses to telephone and mail inquiries.

Many states are being requested to provide broadened support to

their commercial and industrial constituencies.

In order to maintain credibility in these laboratories as traceable

to NBS and to prepare them for measurement demands by their local

industries in the future, a new Laboratory Auditing Program has been

des igned.

1.4. Interactions

Within NBS: OWM interacts with many technical groups within NBS,

providing a delivery mechanism for their work and translating their

scientific and technical products into understandable, problem specific

responses for the OWM constituency. For example, the artifact standards

4
and equipment now in the possession of the States were calibrated by MBS

experts. The codes and handbook on LPG vapor and liquid test and equipment were developed in close cooperation with the cryogenics experts

at NBS Boulder. The handbook on package testing methods was developed

with the Statistical Engineering Division. The methods developed for

testing grain moisture meters are being devised with humidity experts

at NBS.

Currently, coordination is directed toward development of new technology for laboratory and field use at the State level specifically:

(1) a mass comparitor, and (2) fluid meter proving.

The Office of Weights and Measures is developing an increasing

programmatic relationship with a large number of organizational units

within NBS, particularly those involved in research which might lead to

improved and new capabilities for use by States in their laboratory and

field activities. These organizations are:

Office of the Director of Administrative and Information Systems

(Particularly Divisions 344 and 346) Development of new MAP

computer programs, and conversion of publications to word processing.

Center for Absolute Physical Quantities

(Particularly Divisions 521, 522, and 523) Electrical and temperature

calibration services at the State level. Development of mass comparator.

Center for Thermodynamics and Molecular Science

(Particularly Division 544) Assistance to States in establishing

pressure calibration services.

Center for Electronics and Electrical Engineering

(Particularly Division 723) Assisting States in dealing with EM1/RF1

phenomena

Center for Mechnical Engineering and Process Technology

(Particul arly Division 732) Need by States for technology to deal

with high speed, high quantity fluid measurement and meter proving.

Office of International Relations

Participants in visits of foreign weights and measures and standards

officials. Conducts annual weights and measures workshops for

foreign weights and measures officials.

OWM works with a multitude of businesses and associations (mailing

list numbers approximately 8,000), other Federal agencies and departments

(including USDA, FGIS, FTC, FDA, DoT, DoD and OIML).

Outside NBS: OWM 1 s constituency are the State and local weights and

measures jurisdictions. As a result, there is very close and continuous

interaction with regulatory officials, regulated industries, device manufacturers, service companies, other Federal agencies and the public.

For example, packaging and food manufacturers , scale companies, device

repair firms, consumer organizations, fabric and grain mills, railroads.

5
the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and a host of other groups contact

OWM and are contacted by OWM and working with OWM on issues of specific

interest throughout the year. Internationally, OWM coordinates U.S.

weights and measures input to International Organization of Legal Metrology

(OIML) actions. OWM is technical advisor for OIML Pilot Secretariat 7 "Measure of Mass .

2. Program Activity

Major resources of OWM are devoted to providing technical leadership

to weights and measures agencies and, through them, to their constituencies.

In addition to sponsoring the National Conference on Weights and Measures,

OWM participates in and addresses all the regional weights and measures

association conferences, many State meetings, trade and consumer association

conferences and individual industry meetings (see Paragraph 4 of this

Section). Daily written correspondence on general and specific weights

and measures issues is produced by the staff of OWM. For example, in the

category of information, over 800 letters were composed in FY 1980 (see

Par. 4.7). In FY 1980, training was conducted involving most of the 50

States and nearly 1500 industry and government officials participating

(see Par. 4).

2.1. Major Objectives

(1) NCWM: to make legal metrology uniform among the States and

local jurisdictions by providing delivery mechanisms for weights and

measures technical and standards information, including the adoption

of model legislation and guidelines and assisting the States in their

metrication activities.

(2) Technical Services for States: to provide technical advice for

updating and applying device and user codes, procedures, specifications

and gui del i nes

.

(3) Technology Transfer: to promote uniformity in dealing with

anticipated new technology by developing new technical procedures, measurement techniques, and devices for use by State agencies.

(4) State Traceability Services: to provide traceability to national

reference standards and measurement assurance by providing oversight,

evaluation, and guidance to State weights and measures 1 aboratori es

.

2.2. Technical Activities

2.2.1. Railroad Track Scale Calibration Program

Operation of the Railroad Track Scale Calibration Program has been

transferred to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Federal Grain Inspection Service (FGIS) as of October 1, 1979. FGIS will assume operation

of the NBS Clearing facilities (and master scale) in FY 1981.

6
Detailed planning for transfer of the equipment and the Clearing

facility (and master scale) includes training of FGIS personnel in

calibration of large mass standards and establishment of related

measurement assurance program.

2.2.2. Education Programs

Progress has been made toward establishment of measurement science

and practice curriculum at the university level, in continuing education,

undergraduate and graduate programs. The primary effort involves MBS,

the NCWM, the NCSL, Texas A & M University, the University of Texas

at Dallas, Ohio State University, State officials and business interests.

Development of education programs in measurement sciences includes the

conduct of a workshop/seminar involving university, industry, Federal,

and State regulatory officials and the establishment of an Advisory

Council on Education (see Appendix G-l).

2.2.3. Study of State Needs

A study of the needs for accurate and uniform physical or chemical

measurements at the State level, which derived from Government laws and

regulations, has been established and will be conducted with close coordination

with State and indigenous industry representati ves . The most important and

critical factor for planning for the future of OWM is the need to obtain a clear understanding of the evolving weights and measures system (regulatory,

industrial and public) in the U.S. and how NBS can plan to maximize its services

within such a system. No one knows exactly how the sectors interact from

State to State, what methods and legal 'arrangements are superior, and how

such a system should develop or change in the coming years. As a result,

OWM reacts to perceived needs without a perfect grasp on where to lead the

Nation in the future. A carefully planned and comprehensive study of weights

and measures in the U.S. is critically needed. It is difficult to discuss

any definite long range plans of the OWM without the information which such

a study would provide. The study is scheduled for completion during the

next twelve months. The National Measurement Laboeatory is dedicating

assistance for conduct of the study augmenting OWM efforts in the weights

and measures area. (See Appendix G-2).

2.2.4. Automating Preparation of Handbooks

Success has been realized in the use of word processing for the

production and updating of OWM publications (Handbook 44, and new Handbook 130

are now in their second editions since the first steps were taken). The

1980 edition of Handbook 44 was updated and published by mid-August (less

than two months after the changes were adopted by the NCWM). Additional

NBS publications (including replacements for Handbook 67, NCWM proceedings,

and Handbook 112) will be put into word processing: all will be updated

annually as a result of this new capability (Handbook 67 was issued March

1959 and has not been updated since; Handbook 112 was issued in June 1973

and has not been updated since).

7
2.2.5. State Laboratory Programs

The State metrology program has been redesigned to incorporate measurement assurance techniques and regionalization including computing routines

for processing and exchange of State developed data describing the effectiveness of the new techniques and the services delivered by the States (see

Appendi x G-3)

2.2.6. Type Approval

The bilateral agreement between NBS and California in which each

recognizes results of prototype examinations conducted by the other

(thus avoiding duplicative examinations) and through which California

has succeeded in changing state legislation to permit reciprocity with

other jurisdictions is working. Currently, the two organizations are working toward resolution of some details which have surfaced in the

implementation phase. Plans have been made to develop bilateral agreements with other States and agencies (i.e., FGIS) for conduct of prototype examination of devices.

2.8. Impact of New Technology

OWM has several "optimization tasks" underway (see prior pages).

Through its portion of the DMS Long Range Plan, OWM is developing a systematic approach to its measurement services and measurement standards which recognizes the revolution in technology now taking place.

High speed dynamic measurements featuring A/D conversion and microprocessors are becoming commonplace in industry and in the marketplace.

Some weights and measures officials are being faced with certifying the

accuracy of scales tied to laser product code scanners and price computers,

of di gi tal -readout gasoline pumps and fabric meters, etc., all of which

may or may not be electromagnetical ly or otherwise compatible. They

look to OWM to provide technical leadership for dealing with these

challenges.

The small computer revolution will impact OWM activities in a variety of ways. Data handling for measurement assurance programs via

computer networks (already implemented) and centralized data collection

and analysis to facilitate uniformity in weights and measures enforcement are only two promising areas where such technological changes

could favorably alter the way in which NBS deals with those who need

traceability to national standards and those who wish to insure uniformity of national and international measurement standards.

3. Critical Issues

Issues concerning the weights and measures system, its ability to

anticipate and prepare for satisfying future needs include:

(1) Continuing education as well as new educational programs

in measurement practice and science at the undergraduate and graduate

level. Concurrent with development of these procirams is the need

to revise the staffing and training policies of State and local governments to capitalize on these new opportunities through program planning

and budgeting.

8
(2) The need for expansion of State weights and measures laboratory

capabilities is anticipated. Specific needs will be identified as a result

of the "needs" study. In anticipation of new technical demands, State

measurement centers interlinking Federal, regional and industrial measurement

capabilities are being planned and the Laboratory Audit Program is being

redesi gned.

(3) A Comprehensive Plan, "Type Approval for Measuring Devices,"

is being prepared with the NCWM identifying the roles of State and Federal

agencies, industry, and others.

4. Activity Summary

4.1. Sponsored Conferences

o National Conference on Weights and Measures Interim Committee

Meetings - January 14-18, 1980 - NBS

(1 ) 6 Committees

(2) 2 Task Forces

o National Conference on Weights and Measures - June 23-27, 1980,

Washington, D.C.

Supported Conferences

o Southern Weights and Measures Association Conference - October 22-25,

1979, Kansas City, Missouri.

o Northwest Weights and Measures Association Conference - March 3-7,

1980, Minneapolis, Minn.

o Northeastern Weights and Measures Association Conference - April 28-30,

1 980, Springfiel d II 1

.

o Western Weights and Measures Association Conference - September 8-12,

1980, Juneau, Alaska.

9
(/> • 3 f— 0 r

•p" »—1

+-> "O 03 S3 3 Nl aj c cj

03 T— to c CD to to 3 a) 3 •r— 03 O) CD • in 03 j_ 1—

• <u S- s_ u 4-> 03 0 • ci CX • 0 to 3 3 o JO S_ to CJ £ a 0 CO in to to 03 O 03 0 1— 03 0 to a: • 03 03 to • r— cd in 03 to to r

CL> <D < a) i- 2: in ’!— O to c p—

p— 21 21 3: cu CD <C < 03 t—< u £ -0 03 A • to 3 TO TO

— 03 3 0 3 • in S- CD to 0 — 0 " c £3 3 •r- <D to 03 0 &_ O O s- 0 S3 •r- O 03 03

aj 3 S- 3 0 CD 3 s_ a> to CL) 03 03 2 S- O) 0 to to s_ O 0 s_ to 21 CD 03 in to 0 4— 0 +J in 3 03 u_ 3 <. az CJ +-> 4-> <d 4- 3 jo <C +-> 4-> <u • r— r~ SZ

r- 0 4- 03

O S- -XO 2: 1— 1— J3 03 03

03 r—

OO •r- CD 03 a> to 03 03 03 C_3 • 1— •>— O) CJ 03 cd 0 oS 4- .o 03 4— U £_ CD CD O

00 CJ to <0 3 3 ZL 3 m 1

3 in 4_) - 3 12 3

<du <0 S3 r— 3 +-> S3 4-> CD p— 3 $- 3 3 s- c OS U- to 03 to p— OJ CJ S3 J2 S_

03 S- 3 a> s- CD s_ 21 •I— 21 03 03 C_) O) 03 S- <D 3 O) to s_ aj 4- aj -O 0 O 3 •*—> •p— O 4- O XL 03 O) jo 3 JO a> $_ S3 a> J3 O sz 0 T3 >- S3 • p— 4-> aj 4- +-> 0 4-> p— 03 r* p— -M • T— +-> i_ 03 O

+-> rs 21 3 0 0 O 03 2 r— 03 C- +-> S- Q_ 3 2-

O

03 0 0 0 O CJ TO r— 0 O 03

O 03 CD 21 00 0 00 OO C/3 UJ l—1

00 z ZL ZL C_3 ZL

a. SO. E E

03 03 jj 4- 4- 3 4- 3

S3 3 3 3 0 O 3 CD 3 O 3 O) 3 3

CD CD CD CD 1— 1— CD CD p— CD CD O) p— r— r— p— 3 3 u p— 3 p—- U r—

r—- O O O O s_ S_ O •p— O S_ O •p— O O

J3 SZ J3 x: 03 03 SZ 30 03 J3 s_ J3 J3

h- 1— 1— l— 3 3 1— CO 1— 3 1— CQ 1— 1—

con -

4-> s- CD "(D z • p— CD U S_ to JO • p—

3 -t—>

TO +-> > +-> JO 3 z O s_ to 03

03 3 CD •p— • r— O TO in O p— z in •p— 3 2 x; 3 CD 4-> 03 >> 03

•p— L_ 03 03 3 •p—

03 3 S_ r\

O pp- ~T~ Q_ —

in JO CO r— OS 1

03 z. = *r— <DO i— E +J CD <D 3 CD p— U i_ CO 03 3 > 2 O i_ 03 3 S_ O CD •p— CD O 03 3 03 J3 _I TO +J 3 S_ 2 O O

+-> 3 03 “ 3 CD S_

•r* r— 03 -

to < E CD p— (D <D Q_ is 03 CD 3 2 O +-> O +J CJ 1 cc in +-> <D 00 S_ CD f— _

03 S_ • 3 O +J 03 SO. 4- T O < *r— •p— x: Q E TO n (/) 00 Li— • 03 4-> cn 0 3 O <D CO 3 00 CO 03 •p— O c_> 03 CO i- 3 O 4- JJ • ZL CD 4-> 3 r O •!- O to 3 O zz CD p CD +-> E •1- X> 03 3 0) SO. S_ 2 ~~r to 03 4-> 03 CD )— CD z -3 4- 3 O 3 p— s- 03 i- S— JO S_ to 4-> O E -M c_> 0 O 03 CJ <D 3 r— 4-> O

•r- 03 03 03 ZL TO 2 O •r- TO +-> 03 *p~ +J a> s- 3 3 s_ 4- -r- 3 3 3 to

CD 03U 03 *p“ CD

p CD 3 so. •t— to Li—

O •p— p—

s_ p- 0 SO. Q. S- • p—

O 3 • p— CD

(D 21 4- S- CD E 2 CD 03 2 CDO CD +J T~ CJ x: oS 4- Q_ CL) CD p—p

JO S_ 3 SO-C_) JO 03

X

l— 3 O 3Z 1—

O 3 O

O U~l ZL 3 LU

10

8/4/80

"OWM

National

Training

Program"

Tholen

Virginia

Weights

and

Measures

Conference
9/4/80

“Broaden

Your

Horizons"

Tholen

New

Jersey

Weights

and

Measures

Assoc,

a>

03u

on

fOc:o

4-> 03

(_> " O » <J> > m

r- <. Q m

LU C

• cu on 2:

ajo

00c

o

N

S_o

s_3

o

>-c

a) -a

03O

s_ CQ

—1

!

OCO

co

CM

11
4.3. Office of Weights and Measures' Publications

FY 1980

• NBS Special Publication 566 - Report of the 64th National

Conference on Weights and Measures 1979, Report Editors - Harold F. Wollin, Louis E. Barbrow, and Ann P. Heffernan,

Government Printing Office.

• NBS Handbook 130, Model State Laws and Regulations, 1979,

and 1980 editions, Government Printing Office.

t NBS Handbook 44, Specifications, Tolerances, and Other

Technical Requirements for Weighing and Measuring Devices,

1978 and 1980 editions, Government Printing Office.

• NBS Special Publication (number unknown) - Report of the

65th National Conference on Weights and Measures 1980,

Report Editors - Harold F. Wollin, Louis E. Barbrow and

Ann P. Heffernan, Government Printing Office.

12
4.4. Seminars

FY 1980

Specifications, Tolerances, and Other

Considerations

Southern Regional Metrology Seminar

Northeast Regional LPG Liquid and Vapor

Meter Proving Seminar

Western Regional Metrology Seminar

March 3-5, 1980

St. Paul, Minn.

May 15-23, 1980

Atlanta, Ga.

May 20-22, 1980

Albany, N.Y.

Aug. 10-15, 1980

Denver, Colo.

13
4.5. Training Schools

General (Laws & Regulations, Handbook 44,

and Test Procedures) Mass. School

September 2-5, 1979

Lennox, Mass.

General (Laws & Regulations, Handbook 44,

and Test Procedures), Ohio School

October 9-12, 1979

Toledo, Ohio

General (Laws & Regulations, Handbook 44

and Test Procedures) Indiana School

Jan. 14-18, 1980

Indianapolis, Inc.

General (Laws & Regulations, Handbook 44,

and Test Procedures), Mountain States

Regional School

February 12-14, 1980

Denver, Colo.

General (Laws & Regulations, Handbook 44,

and Test Procedures ), Southern Regional

School

February 26-28, 1980

Jackson, Miss.

General (Laws & Regulations, Handbook 44,

and Test Procedures), NSMA

May 20-22, 1980

Columbus, Ohio

General (Laws & Regulations, Handbook 44,

and Test Procedures), Western Regional

School

March 25-27, 1980

Olympia, Wash.

Package Checking Procedures, Michigan

Training Conference

May 28-30, 1980

Belleaire, Mich.

General (Laws & Regulations, Handbook 44

and Test Procedures), New Jersey School

April 8-10, 1980

Trenton, N.J.

General (Laws & Regulations, Handbook 44,

and Test Procedures ), Northern Regional

School

April 15-17, 1980

Billings, Mont.

General (Laws & Regulations, Handbook 44,

and Test Procedures), Virginia School

April 22-24, 1980

Charlottesville, Va.

General (Laws & Regulations, Handbook 44,

and Test Procedures), Northeast Regional

Conference

April 28-May 1, 1980

Springfield, 111 .

General (Laws & Regulations, Handbook 44,

and Test Procedures), Ohio School

May 6-9, 1980

Col umbus , Ohio

General (Laws & Regulations, Handbook 44,

and Test Procedures), New York Conference

June 9-12, 1980

Niagara Falls, N.Y.

General (Laws & Regulations, Handbook 44,

and Test Procedures), New York School

August 4-8, 1980

Morrisville, N.Y.

General (Laws & Regulations, Handbook 44,

and Test Procedures), New Jersey Conference

Sept. 2-4, 1980

Atlantic City, N.J.

General (Laws & Regulations, Handbook 44,

and Test Procedures), Mi dwest Regional

School

Sept. 22-26, 1980

Mitchell, Indiana

14
4.6 . Technical and Professional Committee Participation and Leadership

Name

Barbrow, L.E.

Brickenkamp, C.

Hasko, Stenhen

Oppermann, H.

Smith, R.N.

American Society for Testing & Materials

American National Metric

Council

International Organization for

Legal Metrology

Interagency Committee on Net

Wt . (members : USDA , FDA , FTC , NBS

)

American Institute of Physics

American Assn, for the Advancement of Science

American Crystallographic Assn.

National Conference on Weights &

Measures (Liaison Committee)

Society of Automotive Engineers,

Inc

.

American Nat 1 1 Standards Inst.

Interagency Committee on Net Wt.

Compressed Gas Association

National Conference on Weights & Measures

International Organization of

Legal Metrology

National Conference on Weights

and Measures

National Conference on Weights

and Measures

i q

E43 Metric Practice

E43.10 Technical SC

E43. 10.01 Units Sec.

Metric Practice Com

(Secretary)

U.S. Advisory Com.

U.S. Technical

Advisor on P.S. 18,

P.S. 1 Chairman

Task Force on Grain

Moisture Measurement

Fuel Supply Systems

Speedometer & Tachometer

R109 Gas Displacement

Meteri ng

Cryogenic Flowmetering

Monitoring Committee

Committee on Liaison

Pilot Secretariat 7 "Measures of Masses"

;

U.S. National Working

Group "Scales & Weighing Systems"

Pilot Secretariat 7 "Measures of Masses"/

Reporting Secretariat 7;

U.S. National Working

Group "In-Service Exam."

Metrology Workshops

Committee on Education,

Administration, and

Consumer Affairs
Tholen, A.D.

Warnlof, O.K.

Wo 1 1 i n , H . F

American Association for the

Advancement of Science

Operations Research Society

of America

National Scale Men's Assoc.

International Organization of

Legal Metrology

National Conference on Weights

and Measures

Institute of Weights and

Measures

International Organization of

Legal Metrology

National Scale Men's Assoc.

Alfred Tech

American Society of Mechanical

Engi neers National Conference on Weights

and Measures

International Organization of

Legal Metrology

American National Metric Council

National Conference on Weights

and Measures

Member of ICLM

Member of Executive Com.

of Board of Directors

U.S. Technical Advisor;

Pilot Secretariat 7 Pilot Secretariat 22

Scholarship Committee

Advisory Committee

Scale Committee

Committee on Specifications and Tolerances

U.S. Advisory Committee

Weights and Measures

Sector Committee

Executive Secretary

16
4.7. Consulting and Advisory Centers

State agency representati ves and industry call upon the Office of

Weights and Measures' staff on a continuous basis to consult and advise

them on general and specific issues in weights and measures. The Office

of Weights and Measures (OWM) is the consulting center for weights and

measures issues, problems, and advice nationwide. An estimated 25% of

the time of the staff is involved in this support service.

17


111
Technical Activities

Office of Measurement Services

1 . Introduction

1.1. Mission

The Office of Measurement Services plays an important role as a coordinator

and catalyst within NBS and to a considerable extent within the broader

measurement community for resolving issues involving traceability, measurement

accuracy, and efficient management of precision measurement and test equipment

(PMTE). OMS provides leadership to industry, scientific and technical

institutions, and to other Federal agencies with respect to improving their

measurement programs. OMS coordinates measurement traceability services for

dimensional, electrical, electromagnetic, radiometric, thermodynamic and other

measurements.

In discharging these responsibilities, OMS must be fully cognizant of new trends in measurement science such as the proliferation of complex automated

testing equipment (ATE), requirements for dynamic rather than static

measurements, requirements for new types of measurements (e.g., optical fiber

characteristics), the increasing use of microprocessors in "smart" instruments,

and new approaches to measurement standards (e.g., Josephson .junction voltage

standards). Trends such as these will, in the long run, be likely to lead to

restructuring of the ways in which NBS disseminates measurement services. By

serving on committees, participating in technical conferences, and arranging

workshops, etc., the OMS staff strives to maintain a high level of awareness of

the direction in which the measurement community is heading and to use this

information effectively in working with NBS line management to insure that NBS 1 s services are responsive to the changing needs of the measurement community.

1.2. Functions

The principal responsibilities of OMS are:

• To administer the NBS calibration program.

• To manage a program for the development of new Measurement Assurance Program

services (MAP's).

• To coordinate improvements in the management and use of precision measuring

and test equipment in the Federal Government.

t To develop policies and procedures for NBS Measurement Services.

t To disseminate information on NBS policy on subjects such as traceability,

calibrations, and MAP's.

18
• To serve as the NBS focal point for key outside organizations concerned with

the above issues, such as the National Conference of Standards Laboratories

(NCSL), and the Joint Technical Coordinating Group on Metrology and

Calibration of the Department of Defense.

An important part of OMS's function is to increase awareness within the

technical community of MBS's programs and philosophy in the calibration and

measurement assurance areas. In particular, it is felt that the MAP philosophy

can be important to a variety of standards writing groups concerned with

measurement quality control. Accordingly, OMS places a high priority on disseminating information on the MAP approach to measurement quality by

participating actively in standards committees and other groups concerned with

measurement quality.

1.3. Interactions

The principal interactions between OMS and NBS technical activities fall

within the Center for Absolute Physical Quantities (CAPQ), the Center for

Electronics and Electrical Engineering (CEEE), the Center for Mechanical

Engineering and Process Technology (CMEPT), the Center for Applied Mathematics

(CAM), and the Center for Radiation Research (CRR). Joint activities with these

centers are described in the sections which follow.

OMS's contacts outside NBS are wide-ranging. The National Conference of

Standards Laboratories (NCSL) is the organization that best represents OMS's

customers, hence OMS maintains close liaison with the NCSL Board of Directors

and with the NCSL membership. The Department of Defense is the largest single

user of NBS measurement services. Accordingly, OMS maintains close ties with

the DOD calibration community through the Calibration Coordination Group (CCG)

and its subgroups. OMS also interacts with the higher level DOD group, the

Joint Technical Coordinating Group on Metrology and Calibration (JTCG-METCAL) of

the Joint Logistics Commanders. In addition, OMS is represented on the JLC's

Panel on Automatic Testing.

The NBS PMTE Project (Precision Measuring and Test Equipment) was formed to

coordinate improvements in the management and use of PMTE in the Federal

Government. (A description of the activities of the PMTE Project is given later

in this report.) From time to time the PMTE Project provides information to the

Office of Management and Budget and the General Accounting Office concerning

progress with this activity. The PMTE Project maintains a continuing liaison

with the headquarters level people responsible for precision measurement and

test equipment in other Federal agencies.

Other organizations with which OMS interacts include:

• Voluntary Standards Organizations (ASTM, ANSI, ASOC, OIML)

• Other national standards laboratories (e.g., exploring the "reciprocal

traceability" issue with the National Physical Laboratory in England).

19
• The Industry/ Joint Services Automatic Test Project (IJSATP)

• The Government- Industry Data Exchange Program (GIDEP)

2. Program Activities

2.1. Calibration and Measurement Services

During the past year the administration of the calibration program was reorganized and streamlined. (OMS provides services for processing and control

of measurement services orders and records for services offered to the public

via publication in NBS Special Publication 250. OMS also prepares new editions

of SP 250 as needed and publishes regularly updated lists of fees and services

as SP 250 Appendices.) These activities were merged to a large degree, with the

overall administration of the directorate. The net result is that 4 positions

have been replaced by 2 positions. This will result in a more efficient

operation and has already resulted in a reduction in the amount of staff time

devoted to these activities.

OMS has been developing plans with the NBS management for addressing the

issues which were raised in last year's report about termination of services,

priority setting, and quality assurance. Although no final proposals have been

agreed to at this point, it does appear that a consensus is emerging on the

important steps that need to be taken to improve the calibration services. A

task force, appointed by Dr. Ambler, recently reported on many of the management

issues which they felt needed to be addressed in this area. OMS has been asked

by the Director to review the financial status of the calibration programs and

recommend action to overcome any financial deficiencies which may be uncovered.

Due to the fact that this document is being submitted for publication before

the end of the fiscal year, we do not have the information to complete the

calibration activity tables for FY80. We do know that as of the end of

August, our income is slightly higher than last year so we anticipate that

this will be true for the full year. An estimate is given in the following

tabl e:

Calibration Workload Summary

Total Activity and Income

Total Dollars

(Mill ions)

No . of

Cal i brations

Est.

72 73. 74 75 76_ IQ 77 78 11 FY80

1.6 1 .8 1 .8 1 .8 2.1 0.4 1 .8 1 .8 2.1 2.2

5122 5267 4649 4127 4085 809 3723 3488 3817

20
2.2. MAP Program Development

As discussed in NBSIR 80-2066 (last year's report on DMS activities), there

was a significant increase in FY80 of funding for the development of MAP programs.

Unfortunately before the new projects could be initiated, there was a "hiring

freeze". This seriously affected our plans for FY80 and had its greatest impact

on our plans in the area of electrical measurements.

2.2.1. Pol icy and Planning

There have been no changes in OMS policy regarding the priority for

development of MAP services for the public. The current services in some cases are operating at capacity so that no new customers can be accommodated. In other cases there have been long delays due to equipment failures and lack of

trained personnel. OMS is working with the technical groups and NBS management

to see what can be done to relieve this situation. These problems have raised a policy issue which is, "given the constraints on resources what criteria should

NBS apply in order to ensure that the customers with the highest priority needs are satisfied". We have not reached any conclusions yet, but we clearly need to

do more coordinated planning. This issue is not confined only to MAP services

but also arises in the area of calibrations.

THE REPORTS ON MAP ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT IN THE TECHNICAL DIVISIONS WHICH

FOLLOW HAVE BEEN EXCERPTED FROM MATERIAL SUBMITTED AS REPORTS TO OMS FOR FY80.

2.2.2. Statistical Consulting (Center for Applied Mathematics)

OMS continues to support personnel from the Statistical Engineering Division

to assist the technical divisions in developing MAP's, and in addition, they act

as consultants on statistical problems which arise in the calibration programs.

Highlights from these activities for FY80 are:

• Publication of NBS Technical Note 1127 "National Bureau of Standards Mass

Calibration Computer Software".

• Participation in repeated sessions of a seminar "Linewidth Measurement on Integrated Circuit Photomasks and Wafers," July 15-18, and July 22-25.

• Completion of a section in a report by the Center for Electronics and

Electrical Engineering on "Statistical Analysis of Interlaboratory Linewidth

Study"

.

• Presentation of a three-day seminar on "Gage Block Measurement Assurance",

May 20-22.

• Report to Orton Foundation on "Improvements in Testing and Production

Procedures", after visit by NBS team.

21
• Completion of a preliminary report to Army and Navy on Measurement Assurance

Program for the Calibration of Bolometers.

2.2.3. Electrical Measurements (Center for Absolute Physical Quantities)

The Electrical Measurements and Standards Division's programs have been

under severe stress during the past fiscal year as the reductions due to the

1978 Zero Based Budgeting. Decisions became effective this FY and much of the

staff's time has been taken in training people to assume the duties of those

leaving. Following are status reports on milestones for this fiscal year:

• Completion of facility for testing 10-volt reference standards: This

facility is completed and is making measurements at the 1-2 ppm uncertainty

level. Recent work has resulted in the identification of problems whose

elimination will make sub-ppm level measurements feasible.

t Completion of Technical Note on Voltage MAP's: Incomplete. Deferred until

1981.

• Installation and testing of hardware for automated data collection from

customers: Completed early this FY.

• Software for automated data collection: Unlikely to be completed until next

FY.

t Adapt Volt Ratio MAP to Scaling MAP: Currently evaluating solid-state

voltage standards with which to do this. Staff shortages have delayed pilot

MAP attempt until early in FY82'.

• Preliminary ac voltage and current MAP's completed and data evaluated. Two

transportable standards, each switchable from 25 to 250 volts were

constructed and evaluated for this transfer. The evaluation indicated that

problems with range resistors caused an insufficiently-fl at frequency

response to be useful. Due to insufficient staff, the actual transfer will

not take place until after the new hire is on board.

• Addition of new groups to regional MAP operations.

San Francisco initial intercompari son completed; transfer expected in

September.

Two initial intercompari sons done by Second Los Angeles group. The first

was a failure. After coaching, a second comparison was completed

satisfactorily. The first transfer will take place in September.

The NY-NJ groups are inactive.

A new group has been formed in the Portland area and given software.

• Techniques for extension of volt transfer interval: The analysis of data

indicated the initial L.A. group could go as long as five years between

transfers if a suitable means for them to intercompare could be found.

After an intercomparison with Zener diodes failed to give adequate

22
precision, the decision was made to interchange check standards. The exact

details for this have not been worked out, but the group plans another

transfer in the fall. They will implement a plan subsequent to that.

In addition the following have been accomplished:

• A least-squares analysis program has been adopted for use in analyzing Volt

Transfer Program data.

• A 16 kw electron-beam power supply was installed to support simultaneous and

independent operation of three sources in the thin-film facility in order to

support Josephson device production. The K50 thin-film system was modified

from sputter to multiple-hearth electron beam vaporization to fabricate

lead-alloy junctions.

• Successful lead-alloy Josephson devices were fabricated.

• An etchant for lead but not its indium gold alloy was developed.

• The problem of matching the resonance frequency of a junction to a fixed

microwave source frequency was solved.

• Junctions were fabricated for all commercial voltage standards.

• The first commercial standard was delivered after acceptance testing here.

• A contract will be let to E. Williams for a definitive tutorial publication

on ac voltage and current measurements.

2.2.4. Temperature Measurements (Center for Absolute Physical Quantities)

As noted in last year’s report, the MAP work has been divided into two

general areas--thermometry in the range covered by the new EPT-76 temperature

scale (1976 Provisional C.5K to 30K Temperature Scale), and platinum resistance

thermometry (14K-904K).

These two areas overlap in the temperature range 14K to 30K, but as a practical matter, they involve different measurement technology. The lowtemperature work was introduced into the MAP activity in direct response to

requests from the major suppliers of cryogenics equipment and thermometry. They

have asked NBS to establish a program by which their calibration services can be

basec on the new international temperature scale for cryogenics.

The platinum resistance thermometer work involves the provision of a costeffective calibration program for standard platinum resistance thermometers

(SPRT) for the laboratories making measurements at the most accurate level, and

assistance to industry in setting technically sound standards for less-accurate

industrial platinum resistance thermometers (IPRT's).

23
Within the Temperature Division, the two projects are tied together by a common interest in the development of automatic data acquisition equipment for

calibration, and by a common need for cost-effective calibration methods which

provide adequate accuracy to the user. The computer-based data acquisition

system is under development in the low temperature laboratory, but it will serve

the MAP work throughout the whole range of temperature covered in this report.

The following paragraphs review the accomplishments of the past year in MAP

work.

2. 2. 4.1. Low Temperature MAP

• Cryostat

Preliminary runs prior to FY80 revealed serious problems with the

performance of the EPT-76 cryostat. During the first quarter of FY80

improvements were made to the radiation shielding of the cryostat, and an extensive experimental run was performed during which time intercomparison

data were obtained on ten germanium resistance thermometers (GRT), 2

platinum resistance thermometers (PRT), one rhodium-iron resistance

thermometer (RIRT), one platinum-cobalt resistance thermometer, and 2

superconducting fixed point devices. The cryostat was found to operate

successfully over the EPT-76 range of 0.5K to 30K, and actually reached

temperatures as low as 0.33K. Further improvements to the cryostat are expected to be only minor ones, and are contemplated mainly to make its

operation more economical.

• Data Acquisition System

An analysis of the above described intercomparison data, begun during the

second quarter of FY80, revealed that some serious problems still existed in

the hardware and software of the data acquisition system and in the design

of the experiment. As a result FY80 Milestones were delayed.

Efforts during much of FY80 were directed at identifying and correcting the

problems that still existed in the data acquisition system. In addition,

the system was expanded to improve overall efficiency.

• Realization of EPT-76

Two calibrated GRT from the above intercomparison experiment were

loaned to a typical (MBS) user. Over the temperature range of

interest, 0.33K to 0.67K, the agreement of the two GRT was always

within 0.7 mK—much better than the desired resolution for the

experiment of one percent. In addition to these results, MBS

participation in the experiment provided some insight into the problems

of resistance thermometry measurement encountered by the typical user.

24
A paper was submitted to the 1980 Comite Consul tatif de Thermometric

meeting which reported on findings on the statistical smoothness of the

EPT-76 scale by analyzing data from five calibrated GRT's.

2. 2. 4. 2. Platinum Resistance Thermometry

The platinum resistance thermometry MAP work is concerned with two

measurement accuracy ranges: (a) SPRT's, which are the standard instruments of

the IPTS-68 in the range -259.34 to 630.74°C, with which accuracies of +1 mK can

be achieved over most of the temperature range; and (b) industrial PRT's which

are used from -200 to 1000°C. The accuracy of industrial PRT's depends largely

upon the design and temperature range of use. Also, the thermometry experience

of the staff of different companies varies over a broad range; those with little

experience require considerable consultation help.

There are many laboratories (possibly 24) in the United States that

calibrate SPRT's at accuracy levels of 0.01 K or better. Their temperature

standards are based on SPRT's calibrated at the MBS. The SPRT-MAP work in

progress was developed principally for this group. Thus far, fourteen

laboratories have participated in the program; two have participated twice.

The recently initiated IPRT-MAP work requires considerable development.

First, systematic information must be obtained on the performance of industrial

PRT's, and then sufficiently stable thermometers must be obtained for the MAP

work. In addition, the staff members that are involved in industrial

thermometry have relatively less training in metrology than those involved with

SPRT's. Hence, more consultation time is required. Because of the recent

increase in the number of thermometer manufacturers there are now about 24

companies that are interested in the ASTM round robin work.

During FY80 the SPRT-MAP, which has been in progress for a number of years,

was provided to the Travenol Laboratories, a pharmaceutical manufacturing

company where temperature control is highly critical in its processing

operations. Before the SPRT's were shipped to the company for the MAP

measurements, their personnel visited the MBS. They were provided consultation

on how to maintain internal measurement assurance and documentation using check

thermometers and reference SPRT's calibrated at the NBS. Their documentation

process was reviewed before shipping the SPRT's to them for the MAP comparison.

The results were well within the +0.01 °C accuracy that was desired.

There are at present two laboratories waiting for the SPRT-MAP service.

Although this will be the second time for one of the laboratories , the principal

staff had changed since the first MAP. The new staff could not find the results

of the first MAP so a copy will be sent them. Telephone consultation (so far on three occasions) has been given them on the thermometry MAP.

The above experiences showed that the thermometry MAP concept paper under

preparation must reach an audience of broad range of training in thermometry.

The paper will cover not only the principles but also details of measurements

and documentation.

25
The IPTS-68 is based on fixed points, interpolation instruments, and

interpolation equations. The available data suggest that different SPRT's that

meet the IPTS-68 specifications agree between the fixed points within about 1 mK

above 0°C and within about 2 or 3 mK below 0°C. An apparatus is now partially

assembled for comparison of SPRT's in the range 90 to 900K. The work has been

dormant for several years. If time permits, efforts will be made during FY81 to

complete the assembly and test the apparatus for performance. When the

apparatus becomes operational, it will be suitable also for automatic comparison

calibration of thermometers using computer controlled measurement techniques.

There is very little systematic information on the performance of industrial

PRT's. They are designed to be more rugged than SPRT's in exchange for lower

stability and accuracy than the SPRT's. The instability arises from several

design features of industrial PRT's. Since metal instead of glass is used for

the thermometer sheath, the user often handles the thermometer without adequate

care and causes the calibration to change or even causes the thermometer to

fail. Measurements with metal sheathed thermometers that are out of calibration

because of severe "bumping" is known to be not uncommon.

As part of the ASTM round-robin measurements to determine how well different

industrial standards laboratories are able to test industrial PRT's according to

the ASTM E-644 resistance thermometer test standard, the circulation of

stainless steel sheathed SPRT's was started. However, it was found after

recalling the SPRT's when measurements were obtained by four laboratories that

the calibrations of all of the SPRT's had changed more than that allowable for

suitable evaluation of the measurement process. Although many more NBS

measurements will be required, the SPRT's are now being shipped "back and forth"

between the NBS and the participating laboratories. This procedure will permit

immediate evaluation of the measurement data of a laboratory.

To determine whether the thermometer assembly design causes the results to

scatter, a number of thermometer elements have been obtained. They will be

mounted inside fused silica sheaths. If these PRT's prove to be adequately

stable they will be used for industrial PRT-MAP.

2.2.5. Spectrophotometry Measurements (Center for Radiation Research)

MAP activities of the Radiometric Physics Division for FY80 will be reviewed

in the following three categories of activity:

a. general study,

b. new MAP transport package development, and

c. dissemination.

• General Study (for keeping up with recent methods, regulations, and needs)

Staff members have attended the Surface Analysis Workshop, the Precision and

Accuracy in Measurement and Calibration Workshop, the Optical Radiation

measurement seminar and the Topical Conference on Basic Optical Properties

of Materials. The second draft of "Measurement Quality Control and the Use

26
of NBS Measurement Assurance Program (MAP) Services" by Dr. B. C. Belanger,

is being circulated among staff members.

Staff members have participated in several comnittee and technical meetings,

such as: American Society for Testing Materials Committee E-12 on Appearance (diffuse reflection and retroreflection) , Comnittee D-01.26 on Optical Properties (diffuse reflection and retroreflection) , Committee F-22

on High Visibility of Materials (retroflection) , Inter Society Color Council

(diffuse reflection), Council for Optical Radiation Measurement (diffuse

reflection and retroreflection), and International Commission on Illumination Technical Committee TC-2.3 on Methods of Measuring Photometric

Characteristics of Materials (diffuse reflection and retrorefl ection)

Due to limited travel funds, only four laboratories have been visited: 3M

Co. (retrorefl ection and diffuse reflection), Graphic Arts Research Center

(diffuse reflection), Hunter Labs, (diffuse reflection and retroreflection) , and

Gardner Lab. (diffuse reflection and retroreflection)

• New MAP Transport Package Development

Retrorefl ectance CIL MAP

The retrorefl ectometer has been completely characterized. Candidate

materials (high intensity beaded sheetings and cube corners) have been

measured for temperature (15°C, 24°C, and 32°C) and pressure (25, 30,

and 37 inches Hg) effects. High intensity beaded sheetings have also

been studied under several different incident and observation angles.

The studies for the engineering grade sheetings and cube corners are delayed due to a fatigue problem that developed in one of the

detectors. We have purchased a new detector and are waiting for the

delivery of the detector mount. These studies are to be completed at

the end of FY80.

The color filters to be used as part of the MAP package to check

spectral accuracy are being polished by the optical shop to our specifications. The filter holders have been designed by us and the

main shop has completed the construction. Due to the delay in the

delivery of the color filters and in their polishing by the Optical

Shop, the transmittance measurements of these filters will be delayed

three months.

Diffuse Reflectance MAP

The diffuse reflectance package will contain one set of neutral density

filters and two sets of reflectors. The reflectors (porcelain enamel

on steel) have nominal reflectance of 87, 65, 35, 10, and 2 percent,

and one black glass for 45°/0° reflectance measurements. Two sets of

these reflectors have been measured in the visible spectral region and

bi-directional reflections have been investigated.

27
Several sets of neutral density filters have been polished to our specification by the Optical Shop. Special filter holders have been

designed by our staff members and the NBS Shop has completed the

construction. Measurements of these filters are delayed due to limited

staff. Thus, the completion of the Diffuse MAP Package will be delayed

three months.

• Dissemination

A paper, "Reflectance Properties of Pressed Tetrofl uoroethylene Powder", has

been presented at the Topical Conference on Basic Properties of Materials

held at NBS in May 1980. The summaries of this paper are also published in

NBS SP 574 "Basic Optical Properties of Materials, Summaries of Papers".

Some of our other publications directly or indirectly relating to MAP

activities during FY80 are:

"The NBS Reference Retroreflectometer" , Appl . Opt. 1_9(8), 1253, 1980.

"Photometry and colorimetry of Retroreflection : State-of -Measurement

Accuracy Report", NBS Tech Note 1125, July 1980.

"NBS Specular Refl ectometer-Spectrophotometer" Appl. Opt. 1_9(8), 1268,

1980.

"Didymium Glass Filters for Calibrating the Wavelength Scale of

Spectrophotometers— SRM 2009, 2010, 2013, and 2014", NBS SP 260-66

(October 1979)

.

An article about planned MAP activities has been published in the Optical

Radiation News , NBS April 1980.

2.2.6. Microwave Power (Center for Electronics and Electrical Engineering)

FY80 plans for the RMAP in coaxial bolometric power featured a strong

beginning toward an internal MAP for the NBS microwave power calibration

systems. Also, we expected to design an initial round-robin with RMAP

participants and circulate the transfer standard bolometers.

Significant progress was made on instituting our internal microwave power

MAP. Using primarily the data from measurements on the bolometers used in the

DOD MAP, we were able to obtain estimates of the long-term random variations for

both the coaxial and waveguide measurement systems. As more data are obtained,

these estimates are being updated and the Statistical Engineering Laboratory is

designing new experiments to yield more information. While a good start has

been made, much remains to be done. Check standard bolometers for all bands

have been purchased and are in use with our present systems. The design

employed will be applicable to the new dual six-port systems.

The circulation of transfer standard bolometers to the RMAP participants

will not be done this fiscal year. Rather, a trip to the west coast is planned

28
to visit three or four of the participant standards laboratories. These visits

are necessary in order to adequately design the initial measurement procedure to

be followed by the participants and to explain more as to what they can expect

from a MAP.

The MAP's with the DOD primary standards laboratories have not progressed as fast as we had hoped. For example, data from the Army and Navy coaxial

bolometer initial round was received at NBS in October 1979, but the reports

have not yet been issued. The delay was due in part to the need to measure the

MAP bolometers on at least three occasions at NBS before beginning the analysis.

These were completed by the end of April 1980, and the analysis by SEL was completed a short time later. However, SEL people have not released the report

because they would like it reviewed by their counterparts at NBS Gaithersburg

who have had more experience with MAP's.

The Air Force 10-1000 MHz second-round MAP report was delayed to allow at

least three measurement occasions on the MAP bolometers at NBS. The report has

been sent to the Air Force and the instructions for the second-round 1-18 GHz coax MAP are being written.

2.2.7. X-Ray Radiation Exposure to 150 KeV (Center for Radiation Research)

Ionizing radiation of this type for medical diagnostic purposes represents

the largest, by far, source of exposure to the general public of man made

radiation. The states by and large are responsible for regulating these

exposures. A well -developed measurement system traceable to national standards

does not exist throughout the states. It is the objective of this project to

determine if a highly leveraged regional measurement assurance system can work.

Activities in this project involve two categories: The Radiation Physics

Division will identify and characterize ionization chambers and associated

electrical equipment to be used as transport standards for the proposed

measurement services. Due to the hiring freeze, this part of the project was delayed. Toward the end of the year a person was reassigned to this project and

plans have been developed for FY81

.

The second part of this project for FY80 is a survey of industrial and other

secondary laboratories to determine their needs for measurement assurance

services. This survey was conducted by the Office of Radiation Measurements.

2.2.8. Force Measurements (Center for Mechanical Engineering and Process

Technology)

A Customer Data Base is being developed. The objective is to develop, for

each customer, a hard copy file of essential technical data about the customer's

use of the service we provide. This should include a descriptive identification

of the systems that we calibrate, a description of the loading conditions and

the environmental conditions, and a statement of the performance requirements of

the customer's application. Input to this data base has come from numerous

telephone calls and from conferences with visitors and guest workers in cur lab.

29
NBS staff have met with representatives of Boeing, Hydril Corp., MTS Corp.,

Lebow, Sandia, Interface, Alinco, and the Maryland State Police. NBS staff have

also met with technical managers who are responsible for force measurement in

the national labs of the Netherlands, Italy, France, and Belgium.

The literature about force measurement is not at all well developed. This

area has a high priority during FY81 . A paper "Inherent Problems in Force

Measurement" was presented at the IMEKO Force Measurement Session of the 4th

SESA International Conference on Experimental Mechanics in May. There are plans

to present a paper at the Instrument Society of America conference next April.

An extensive compilation of basic information on force measurement in loose leaf

notebook form is being collected. It will not be published in this form

although it will be very useful in writing papers, developing workshops or seminar material, and in instructing new employees, guest workers, and others.

A microcomputer based data system has recently been built. It interfaces

with the NBS central computer and with CRT terminals that will eventually be

located in each force lab. Data can be entered during a calibration, analyzed,

and then plotted on the CRT relative to a fitted model and along with the

statistical parameters. As the Calibration History Data Base is implemented,

the new data will be analyzed in comparison with prior calibration of the same force measurement system. The data system also has a report quality hard copy

printer that will eventually produce the complete calibration report.

Some force measurement systems are so severely resolution limited that the use of ordinary statistical methods can be misleading. A resolution limited

condition may or may not be apparent from a remainder plot of the data relative

to an assumed model. Cliff Spiegelman of the Center for Applied Mathematics has

been developing statistical methods that would appropriately describe the

response of these systems.

The micrometer screws ordinarily used to indicate the deflection of proving

rings are severely resolution limited and inefficient to use. What is needed is

a self balancing, machine readable, electronic deflection sensing system. A few

years ago, James Whetstone (Fluid Engineering) made a significant start in

developing an LVDT/ratio transformer system that would probably do the job.

This equipment has recently been transferred to the force lab and the project

will continue.

There are important customer needs for the in-place calibration of large

capacity (greater than 1,000,000 Ibf) special purpose force machines. NBS

provided the necessary compression transfer standards and assisted on-site in

the calibration of a 4,000,000 Ibf capacity dynamic fqrce machine at the DOE

Mine Safety Lab near Pittsburgh. NBS has been developing plans with the Hydril

Corporation (deep oil well drilling equipment) for similar on-site assistance

using our compression transfer standards. The need for this type service (from

MBS or some other source) will probably increase. To be able to provide this

on-site service, or to provide the necessary calibration support for someone

else to provide the on-site service, NBS needs to upgrade its stock of

compression transfer standards, and we need to develop the capability for largeforce tensile calibration and transfer. It may be that an alternate" form of

Force MAP will be needed for these large-force applications.

30
Some conceptual planning has been carried out in anticipation of holding a Force Measurement Seminar, possibly in early FY82. Plans are not far enough

along to justify an announcement in the 1981 NBS Precision Measurement Seminar

brochure.

*

31
2.3. PMTE Project

2.3.1. Background

The Precision Measuring and Test Equipment (PMTE) Project is an organizational element of the Office of Measurement Services (OMS). It was established by the NBS in 1978 in response to a request from the Director,

Office of Management and Budget (0MB). Its principal responsibilities as assigned by 0MB are as follows:

• Assume the lead for coordinating improvements in the Government's management

and use of PMTE.

• Assist Federal agencies as necessary to identify areas for improvement.

• Recommend to 0MB such actions as are needed to improve the management and

use of PMTE.

Additional information on the origin of the PMTE Project is provided in

Appendix G-3.

2.3.2. Objectives

The principal goal of the PMTE Project is "to improve the effectiveness and

reduce the cost of Federal-wide PMTE operations". This goal has been defined by

the project as including the following specific objectives related to the

coordinating of improvements to Federal -wide PMTE operations:

• To improve the communications and exchange of information (management and

technical) among individuals and facilities involved in management or use of

PMTE.

• To identify and gain broad adoption within Federal agencies of particularly

effective existing technologies and management techniques.

• To increase use of other agency and/or contractor metrology and calibration

capabil i ties.

• To reduce the growth rate of Federal metrology and calibration facilities.

• To assess the effectiveness of current PMTE programs of other agencies.

• To identify and develop joint plans for addressing the high priority

problems or needs common among several agencies.

t To recommend to CMB and the other agencies actions needed to improve the

management and use of PMTE.

32
2.3.3. Actions

In its first two years of operation, the PMTE Project has directed most of

its resources toward short-term actions aimed at optimizing existing systems.

However, a high priority has also been given to longer term actions which will

hopefully lead to the development and introduction of new and innovative

approaches toward accomplishing the calibration function and other management

and technical functions related to PMTE management and use.

2. 3. 3.1. Capabilities Catalog

The second edition of the "Catalog of Federal Metrology and Calibration

Capabilities", NBS Special Publication 546 was prepared and submitted for

publication. The catalog is intended to encourage cooperation and exchange of

services or equipment among agencies. If successful in these areas, it will

reduce the growth rate of Federal metrology and calibration facilities. The

catalog lists laboratories, their locations, capabil ityV and names and telephone

numbers of points of contact. To provide geographical distribution, the

laboratories are listed by States, and are also shown on a single map by coded

number. This edition of the catalog contains listings on 269 laboratories from

the DOC, DOD, DOE, DHHS, DOT, FCC, and NASA.

2. 3. 3. 2. News! etter

Two issues of "PMTE UPDATE", were prepared and published. This is a newsletter which is distributed to Federal metrology and calibration

laboratories, laboratory and staff level managers, and other interested parties

throughout the Federal PMTE community, including several U.S. military

organizations in Japan, Korea, Okinawa, and Germany. The "PMTE UPDATE" is

intended to improve communications within the PMTE community by providing timely

information on new developments, publications and meetings, describing

successful strategies of PMTE management and use, and by providing a forum for

discussing issues of current interest to the community. For example, the most

recent two issues included informative articles on:

• Reverse traceabil i ty—as implemented by DOE's Oak Ridge facility, the

ability to determine which instruments were calibrated with a given

standard so that, if the standard is found to be out of tolerance,

corrective action can be taken.

• Use of the Government-Industry-Data-Exchange Program (GIDEP). GIDEP

provides calibration procedures, failure experience data, and other

information for the improvement of quality and reliability and the

reduction of costs.

• U.S. Army video tape training program to aid calibration technicians in

the proper operation, maintenance, and calibration of equipment and

standards

33
• Ultrasonic Nondestructive evaluation—a review of the NBS efforts in

this important area with an emphasis on new standards under

development.

0 Calibration software management—how a Navy facility (Naval Avionics

Center) has implemented a program for management of calibration

software. Software "certifi cation” can be as important as hardware

"calibration” in assuring the quality of automated measurement. The

Naval Avionics Center program is described in a publication which is

available upon request from that activity.

0 A modulation factor standard developed at NBS to support the FAA's

requirements for a measurement capability for ILS or VOR navigation

systems.

0 Changes in NBS measurement services.

0 How NCSL is working to develop training programs for calibration

technicians. Another article included information on NCSL's efforts in

laboratory automation.

0 Periodic updating of information on the activities of the PMTE Project,

including one article specifically related to the progress of the costeffectiveness studies. Every effort is made to encourage interest in,

and participation in, the various activities of the PMTE Project.

0 Standards Information Service—an NBS program to provide up-to-date

information on standards and standardization activities. This service

is based on a reference collection of over 240,000 standards,

specifications, test methods, and recommended practices, both foreign

and domestic.

The "PMTE UPDATE" has been well received by its many readers, and several

have taken the time to send written comments on its benefits to the PMTE

community. Circulation was initially just under 600. It has since risen to

approximately 1200 and is still growing. Copies of the two recent issues

are provided in Appendix G-4.

2. 3. 3. 3. Cost Effectiveness Studies

PMTE cost-effectiveness studies, sponsored and funded by NBS and conducted

by the Raytheon Service Company, were completed in the following two areas:

0 Feasibility and cost-effectiveness of increasing the use of in-situ

calibrations, calibration checks, measurement assurance programs, or other

alternatives to out-of-service equipment calibrations for measurement

quality assurance and control in the Federal government. In this study,

successful alternatives to out-of-service equipment calibration were

identified. Each alternative was evaluated to the extent possible,

considering the limited availability of cost and performance data, to

34
determine the benefits and/or costs of Federal -wide adoption. The executive

brief of this study, including its findings and recommendations is provided

in Appendix G-5.

• Cost-effectiveness of optimizing calibration recall intervals and algorithms

for PMTE. This study examined situations where adjustment of calibration

recall intervals for different types of PMTE has improved measurement

quality or reduced costs without degrading measurement quality. It also

examined the advantages of Federal -wide guidelines for setting and adjusting

PMTE calibration intervals. The executive brief for this study is provided

in Appendix G-6.

In the performance of these studies, questionnaires were distributed to some

50 Federal activities and 23 Federal calibration facilities were visited

to gather technical and cost data related to the government's management and use

of PMTE. Members of the PMTE Project staff accompanied the contractor on many

of these visits and monitored the company's performance throughout the contract.

The results of these studies are expected to point the way towards

significant improvements and cost reductions in the management and use of PMTE

throughout the Federal government.

2. 3. 3. 4. Automatic Test Equipment (ATE) Activities

• Coordinated an NBS proposal and the subsequent establishment of a multiple

year NBS/DOD JLC program for evaluating traceability for DOD ATE.

1. NBS (CEEE) work for the last Quarter FY80 involved development of a work plan for calibration/performance verification of several ATE

systems of the same type. This work was funded by the USAF MATE

Program Office.

2. NBS (CEEE) work for FY81 will be to acquire and characterize necessary

portable standards and to carry out the measurement experiments set

forth in the plan developed in FY80. This work will be co-funded by

the USAF MATE Program office and DOD CCG.

3. NBS work in subsequent FY will be determined by the outcome of the

above work.

• Coordinated and served as NBS focal point for NBS (CEEE) work on development

of a sensor handbook for the DOD JLC AT Panel. This work was funded by the

Army and carred out by Paul Lederer of CEEE.

• Coordinated development of preliminary plans for CEEE (Lederer) follow-on

work related to the sensor handbook.

• Actively participated in the establishment of the NSIA Ad Hoc Panel on ATE

which is chartered to follow implementation cf I/JSATP recommendations,

monitor the JLC AT Panel activities, and provide advice to the JLC.

35
• Actively participated as a panel member and presenter at the first NSIA/JLC

annual ATE Program Review.

• Actively participated as the NBS invited representative to the JLC AT Panel.

• Attended "Autotestcon '79", September 1979, in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

This is an international automatic testing conference.

• Participated in the NBS Seminar: "Metrology of Modern Electronic

Instrumentation", a seminar which considered the metrology problems of

automated measurement systems. May 13-15, 1980.

• Attended an NBS Lecture Series: "Testing Strategies for Complex Electronic

Systems", which addressed fault models, testability measures, self-checking

circuit design, design for testablity, and self-diagnosing systems.

August 11-15, 1980.

2. 3. 3. 5. Training

Cooperated with the NCSL in the development of technician training programs.

This is especially important in that training has been identified by several

agencies as one of their highest priority problems.

• Participated in an NCSL survey to establish the priority topics for

metrology/cal ibration training.

t Coordinated and developed meetings between NCSL and key NBS

representatives to initiate preparation of a course on temperature

measurement.

• Cooperated with NBS and NCSL efforts to attract college/university

interests in establishing metrology education programs.

• Hosted visits of NCSL representatives and faculty members from an academic institution to encourage their adoption of training program

objectives.

2. 3. 3. 6. Standardization of Calibration Procedures

During FY80, a project was established to examine and compare differences

between multiple procedures written/published by several agencies for the same

item, assess the technical and economic significance of the differences, and

attempt to estimate the benefits/costs of total or partial standardization.

The first phase of this work, which consisted of examination of five procedures

for calibration of the Tektronix 475 oscilloscope, was completed and showed that

a great deal of technical similarity exists between procedures. The second

phase will be a more in-depth look at multiple procedures for several other PMTE

i terns

.

36
2. 3. 3. 7. Standard Terms and Definitions

The initial draft of a handbook on this subject was completed. It is

essentially a compilation of the many terms and definitions currently published

and/or used by the Federal agencies. Subsequent issues may only include one standard definition for each term.

2. 3. 3. 8. Other Activities

• Provided assistance to the U.S. Air Force Logistics Command Inspector

General's Office in its inspection of the Aerospace Guidance and Metrology

Center (AGMC). This effort was mutually beneficial, as it afforded the PMTE

Project an opportunity to learn more about particularly effective Air Force

PMTE concepts, and resulted in management improvement suggestions for the

AGMC.

• Assisted the DOT in reviewing the capability and status of FAA and USCG

calibration laboratories and facilities.

• Actively participated as a Member of the Executive Steering Group and

presenter at the Annual (1980) Worldwide Conference of the DOD Defense

Retail Interservice Support (DRIS) Program.

• Actively participated and made a presentation at the annual DOE Calibration

Managers Conference, St. Petersburg, Florida.

• Visited several Federal and private sector metrology and calibration

facilities:

Department of Defense

Army Metrology and Calibration Center, Redstone Arsenal, AL

Air Force Aerospace Guidance and Metrology Center, Newark, OH

Air Force Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma City, QK

Department of Energy

Bendix Corporation, Kansas City Division, Kansas City, MO

General Electric Neutron Devices Company, St. Petersburg, FL

Department of Transportation

National Aviaion Facilities Experimental Center, Atlantic City, NJ

Coast Guard Electronic Engineering Center, Wildwood, NJ

FAA Aircraft Services Base and FAA Depot, Oklahoma City, OK
National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD

Goddard Spacecraft Data Network Depot, Columbia, MD

Private Industry

Lockheed Missile and Space Company, Sunnyvale, CA

Boeing Aerospace Company, Seattle, WA

Rockwell International, Autonetics 'Division, Anaheim, CA

• As a result of the above visits and other interactions, we identified and/or

further verified the following several specific opportunities for

improvement in Federal PMTE Management and use:

1. Calibration Productivity—our observations noted a low of 100 actions

per person per year to a high of 1300 actions per person per year at

facilities having similar although not identical mixes of workload.

2. Average Calibration Time—we saw a range of 0.5 hour to more than 7

hours for the same mechanical item in one case and 0.5 hour to 15 hours

in another case involving an electronics item, with less pronounced

variations in many more cases.

3. Terms and Definitions— the PMTE terms we are all familiar with just

don't mean the same thing to everyone.

4. Calibration Procedures—differences between procedures for the same

item appear to be more philosophical than technical in nature.

5. Calibration Intervals— ranging from 90 days to two years for the same

model PMTE item.

6. Traceability for Automatic Test Equipment (ATE)--the current concepts

for establishing measurement traceability are somewhat questionable.

7. Calibration Training— remains a serious problem. Training is difficult

to obtairv.-Trained technicians are hard to retain.

8. Management Practices— are .weak or virtually non-existent at some

facilities. Management information is often limited.

• Expanded the PMTE Interagency Group to include representatives from the FCC,

DHHS* (PHS), and DOC agencies other than the NBS. Held quarterly meetings

of the Interagency PMTE Committee, which afforded policy and planning level

representatives of the Federal agencies an opportunity to exchange

information on PMTE problems and successes. These meetings were also used

38
to identify and prioritize problems for action or investigation by the PMTE

Project. For example:

1. Staff slots for interagency agreements—Most agencies are willing to

do work for another agency, but only if the work is accompanied by the

additional staff slots required to do it. The staff ceiling for

each agency is tightly controlled, therefore, the additional slots may

have to be transferred from the benefitting agency. The PMTE Project

has identified procedures for transfer of slots, for the duration of

the interagency agreement, between the DOD and civil agencies. We are presently attempting to conduct a test case which will involve transfer

of slots. The outcome of this test case may well determine the extent

to which calibration work can be exchanged among the Federal agencies

(carryover from previous year).

2. Need for exchange of management and technical information. In response

to requests for guidance or information on how "other" agencies and/or

the private sector have handled certain problems, the PMTE Project has

disseminated documented policy and procedures on the following areas:

DOD draft standard calibration label /tag system

Army management information system

JLC five year plan for ATE

Navy "MEASURE" management information system

NBS calibration and measurement services

Calibration intervals

Measurement assurance programs

NCSL conference proceedings

2.3.4. Plans for FY81

In addition to continuing present efforts (e.g., interagency

meetings/workshops, routine updates to the capability catalog, PMTE UPDATE,

visits, etc.), the PMTE Project will undertake the following tasks or actions

during FY81

:

• Reports from the contracted-out cost-effectiveness studies will be

coordinated with other agencies, and an action plan for improvement

developed. Actions resulting from these studies may include long-term

improvements extending over the next 5-10 years.

• Special reports/handbooks will be developed and issued on:

1. Baseline assessment and progress of Federal agency PMTE programs.

2. Standardization of calibration procedures.

3. Standard PMTE Terms and Definitions.

39
4. Guidelines for establishing a calibration program, systematically

determining calibration requirements, and intervals, and application of

limited calibration, calibrate before use (CBU), etc.

• The capabilities catalog will be further expanded to include the

laboratories of other Federal agencies.

• The number of Federal agencies involved in PMTE interagency coordination

will be increased to include other agencies having significant PMTE

activities. The need for formal chartering of the interagency PMTE Group

will be examined in depth. If the need exists, a formal charter will be

drafted, coordinated within NBS and with other agencies, and forwarded for

approval/signature at the DOC or 0MB level.

• Specific goals (short and long-term) for improvement will be developed

and/or updated for each problem or opportunity discussed herein or surfaced

during the year (e.g., productivity, intervals, recall, management

practices, ATE traceability, etc.).

• A positive feedback or management indicator system will be developed for

measuring the effectiveness of the PMTE Project and other agency PMTE

programs.

• Recently collected data on variations in average calibration times and

calibration intervals will be analyzed and evaluated to provide a better

understanding of the variations— in the hope that both productivity and

quality can be improved.

These plans will be adjusted as necessary and to the extent possible to

accommodate the high priority requirements of other Federal agencies which may

emerge during the year.

40
2.4. Other QMS Activities

OMS has been deeply involved in ASTM Committee E-46 on Quality Systems since

its inception. (Brian Belanger is Chairman of the E-46. 91, the Interface Subcommittee.) E-46 intends to provide guidelines to all of ASTM concerning the

incorporation of adequate quality provisions in ASTM standards and test methods.

Among other topics, E-46 will be concerned with measurement quality and calibration, and thus, NBS will have an excellent opportunity to contribute to the

development of guidelines on measurement quality control that will be widely

used.

The ANSI Z-l Committee on Quality Systems, for which ASQC holds the secretariat,

has formed a writing group for quality standards for calibration systems and

measurements. This activity is being carried out under the auspicies of the

Metrology Technical Committee (MTC) of ASQC. Brian Belanger of OMS is a member

of both the standards writing group and the MTC, and Chairman of a Task Group to

develop tutorial material for the standard on random errors, systematic errors,

and control charts. Both in this activity and in the E-46 work, the role of OMS

is to contribute whatever technical input it can directly and to keep interested

parties in other parts of NBS appraised of the progress of the work and involve

those NBS persons having relevant expertise in this work as appropriate.

Brian Belanger of OMS serves as Chairman of the U.S. Working Group for

Reporting Secretariat 6 of Pilot Secretariat 22 of the International Organization

of Legal Metrology (OIML). One goal of OMS's involvement in RS 6 is to make the

recommendations which it ultimately will develop as consistent as possible with

U.S. domestic standards such as those under development in ASQC and ASTM.

Additionally, OMS will strive to incorporate the views of key U.S. organizations

such as the Scale Manufacturers Association and the Scientific Apparatus Manufacturers Association. During FY80 meetings of the U.S. National Working Group

for RS 6 were held and a draft International Document was developed on a consensus

basis. This document was presented to the collaborating countries at a meeting in

Paris in April. While the U.S. draft generated considerable controversy, it does

appear that a document can be developed that will be acceptable to all concerned

parties. OMS intends to prepare a revised draft during FY80 incorporating the

suggestions discussed at the Paris meeting.

The plan for expanded NBS/ASTM collaboration discussed in last year's

report (NBSIR 80-2026) was approved by both NBS and ASTM during FY80 with only

minor modifications. NBS staff members from DMS met with ASTM Headquarters

Staff during FY80 and several steps have been taken to implement the

provisions of the NBS/ASTM agreement. These include:

• Brian Belanger has been working closely with Committee E-28 to obtain their

input for NBS planning of MAP's in the force area. Belanger briefed

E-28. 01 (Calibration of Mechanical Testing Machines and Apparatus) at their

June meeting in Chicago and plans for a possible workshop on force

measurements are being considered.

41
• ASTM awareness of and participation in OIML activities is now much enhanced

Mr. Joseph Palmer of ASTM participated in activities of the U.S. Advisory

Committee for OIML during FY80.

• Discussions have been initiated between NBS, ASTM Headquarters Staff, and

ASTM Committee leaders to explore alternatives to NBS calibration services.

OMS participated in the NBS/Montgomery County Public Schools Science and

Technology Enrichment Program (Belanger and Leedy in FY80). Lecture/demonstrations

on measurement standards were made to several elementary schools, junior high

schools, and high schools during the school year. This activity will continue in

FY81

.

Each year OMS publishes and distributes a brochure describing NBS measurement

seminars given by NBS technical divisions.

Brian Belanger and Jack Vogt of OMS were asked to represent NBS at the Third

NATO Symposium on Quality and its Assurance held in Washington DC on June 2-6, 1980

Discussions which took place during this Symposium indicated that people involved

in multinational NATO projects had observed problems associated with measurement

discrepancies that may be due to inadequate coordination of National reference

standards for highly derived units. For example, in the multinational project to

develop the "T0R0NAD0" jet fighter for NATO forces, concerns were noted in areas

such as accelerometers, fluid metering, and hardness measurements. This suggests

that OMS's efforts to investigate reciprocal traceability as discussed in last

year's Panel Report continue to be important. Other commitments prevented any

appreciable progress in this area during FY80, but it is hoped that more attention

may be devoted to this topic during FY81

.

At the request of the Center for Materials Science, the Office of Measurement

Services assembled an interdisciplinary team of NBS personnel to assist the Orton

Foundation in reviewing, and if possible, upgrading its measurement quality

assurance. The Edwin Orton Jr. Ceramic Foundation, a non-profit foundation

located in Columbus, Ohio, provides technical support for the entire U.S. ceramics

community, ranging from large corporations to individual hobbyists. Orton

manufactures and sells each year approximately 40 million pyrometric cones, a device used to monitor the combined efforts of temperature, time, and atmosphere,

in the firing of ceramics. The team assembled by OMS, which visited Orton in

April, included people from both NEL and NML. The final technical report to

Orton was compiled and edited by OMS and was considered by Orton to be extremely

helpful to them in improving its cone calibration and production processes.

OMS also contributed to NBS's EEO/Affirmative Action activities during FY80.

Brian Belanger addressed a combined meeting of the Georgia Tech Chapters of the

National Society of Black Engineers and the Society of Women Engineers on the

Georgia Tech campus in May. In July, OMS arranged to have Dr. A. Esogbue of

Georgia Tech (faculty advisor to the NSBE) visit NBS and present a seminar. During

his visit, OMS hosted a highlight tour of NBS so Dr. Esogbue would be in a better

position to counsel minority students at Georgia Tech regarding careers at NBS.

42
OMS continues to be very active in NCSL. OMS staff members participate in

a number of NCSL committees (e.g., Kieffer: Measurement Assurance, National

Measurement Requirements; Leedy: Education and Training). Brian Belanger was Conference Co-Chairman for the 1980 Workshop and Symposium at the Bureau and the

OMS Administrative Staff contributed much to the successful hosting of this

meeting by NBS.

3. Activity Summary

3.1 . Invited Tal ks

Belanger ASTM Committee E-28.01 Meeting, Chicago, IL, "Measurement

Assurance Program for Force Measurements", June 25, 1980.

Joint Meeting of Georgia Tech Chapters of National Society of

Black Engineers and Society of Women Engineers, Georgia Tech

University, Atlanta, GA, "An Overview of NBS Research Activities",

May 22, 1980.

Annual Meeting, Acoustical Society of America, Atlanta, GA,

"Traceabil ity" , (panel discussion), April 23, 1980.

Measurement Science Conference, San Luis Obispo, CA, "Measurement

Challenges for the 1980's", (lead-off talk for panel discussion),

November 30, 1979.

Kieffer National Conference of Standards Laboratories , NBS Gaithersburg,

"NBS Measurement Assurance Services", (panel chairman),

September 22, 1980.

Vogt Third Annual NASA Calibration Workshop, "PMTE Project Update", and

"PMTE Cost-Effectiveness Studies", October 17-19, 1979.

Department of Energy Meeting of the Standards Laboratory Managers,

"PMTE Project", November 6-7, 1979.

Annual Worldwide Defense Retail Interservice Support (DRIS)

Meeting, "Federal -wide PMTE Program", January 1 5-16, 1980.

3.2. Publications by OMS Personnel

1. "National Bureau of Standards Mass Calibration Computer Software", R. N. Varner

and R. C. Raybold, NBS Technical Note 1127, July 1980.

2. "Catalog of Federal Metrology and Calibration Capabilities", K. Leedy, NBS

Special Publication 546, September 1980.

43
3. "Challenges in Achieving ATE Traceability to NBS", Proceedings of AUTOTESTCON

Conference, Minneapolis, MN, B. Bell, M. Souders, B. Belanger, and R. Kamper,

September 1979.

4. "Laboratory Performance Evaluation Services of the U.S. National Bureau of

Standards", B. Belanger, J. Bryson, and G. Uriano, Proceedings of the Testing

Laboratory Performance Evaluation and Accreditation Conference, September 25-26,

1979.

5. "Traceability in the USA: An Evolving Concept", B. Belanger, OIML Bulletin

No. 78, page 7, March 1980.

6. "Prospects for a Model Program for Realization of Traceability in Low-Level

Radioactivity Measurements", D. E. Edgerly and B. C. Belanger, Proceedings

of Meeting of International Commission for Radionuclide Metrology.

3.3. Technical and Professional Committee Activity

Belanger Member, ASTM Committee E-46--Qual i ty Systems, (Chairman, Interface

Subcommittee, and Chairman, Nominating Subcommittee.

Belanger Member, U.S. National Working Group for OIML Pilot Secretariat 22,

and U.S. National Advisory Committee for OIML, (Chairman,

Reporting Secretariat 6).

Belanger Member, ANSI Committee Z-l Writing Group for Standards for

Calibrations Systems and Measurements (Chairman of Task Group).

Belanger Member, ASQC Metrology Technical Committee

Belanger Member, Task Group II (Metrology and Calibration of Industry Joint

Services Automatic Test Project.

Belanger Member, NCSL Measurement Assurance Committee

Edinger Member, GIDEP Metrology Committee

Kieffer Member, NCSL Measurement Assurance Committee

Kieffer Member, NCSL National Measurement Requirements Committee

Leedy Member, Special Committee on General Purpose Electronic Test

Equipment, Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics.

Leedy Member, NCSL Committee on Automatic Test Equipment

Vogt Invited Participant, Department of Defense Joint Logistics Commander's

Panel on Automatic Testing

44
Vogt

Vogt

Vogt

Member, Government Advisory Group, GIDEP, (Government-Industry

Data Exchange Program)

Member, Steering Group for NSIA ad hoc Committee on Automatic

Test Equipment

Executive Coordinating Agent and Member, Executive Steering

Group for Department of Defense Retail Interservice Support

(DRIS) Program

45

IIIIIIIIII
Office of Domestic and International Measurement Standards

Technical Activities

1 . Introduction

1.1. Background

During the reorganization of NBS in 1978, Bureau management decided to

establish standards coordination offices within each Major Operating Unit

(NML, NEL, ICST) as a means of increasing the sensitivity of line managers

and standards participants to external pressures (e.g., 0MB Circular A119,

ANSI Service-Fee System, proposed FTC Rule on Standardization, MTN International Standards Code), and as a management tool in disseminating policy

and information concerning standardization activities. A high level

Standardization Advisory and Coordination Committee was also established,

with representation from the MOUs, to bring standards matters, as appropriate,

to the attention of the NBS Director and Executive Board.

The Office of Domestic and International Measurement Standards (ODIMS)

is the designated NML standards coordination office. ODIMS also manages

the responsibilities of NBS in connection with United States participation

in the International Organization of Legal Metrology (OIML), and serves as the NML focal point through which support is provided to the Associate Director

for International Affairs in the conduct of cooperative scientific programs with

other nations.

1.2. ODIMS Mi ssion

The Office plans, administers, and actively participates in an extensive

program directed towards:

-- Managing assigned NBS responsibilities to represent the United

States in the International Organization of Legal Metrology (OIML);

-- Coordinating the NML involvement in domestic and international

voluntary standards activities, including maintaining current and

complete information on such standards activities, especially as regards the commitment of NML resources;

-- Coordinating and facilitating NML staff participation in international cooperative scientific and technological programs in

support of the Office of the Associate Director for International

Affairs; and

-- Supporting, as required, the Associate Director for Measurement

Services

.

1.3.

Interactions

In support of the objectives of United States participation in OIML,

there is strong liaison with all interested and affected parties including:

the National Conference on Weights and Measures; industry associations and

private corporations involved or interested in scientific and measuring

instruments; and. Federal agencies having legal metrology mandates. Some of

46
these interactions are institutionalized through a U.S. Advisory Committee

for International Legal Metrology with representation from the interests

mentioned above. There is also strong liaison with the national metrology

services of the 46 nations who are OIML members.

ODIMS supports and interacts with tasks and programs of NMl Centers

and Divisions where staff participate in domestic and international measurement

standards activities. It establishes and maintains contacts with private

sector standards bodies (ASTM, ANSI, SAE, NCCLS, etc.) as appropriate.

In support of bilateral /multi lateral programs for cooperation in

science and technology, there are interactions with NML tasks and programs

to identify and establish appropriate projects, and there is interaction

with the various counterpart scientific organizations and institutions of

other nations. Contact with the Department of State and with various U.S.

Embassies and Consulates is also necessary.

2. Program Activity

2.1. Major Objectives

-- Improve U.S. trade opportunities in the scientific and measuring

instrument field by removing technical and administrative differences

in legal metrology standards, and by promoting the harmonization of

U.S. and OIML legal metrology requirements;

-- Improve the management and coordination of NML resources conmitted

to standards activities;

-- Promote and facilitate NML participation in bi 1 ateral /mul ti I ateral

cooperative exchanges in science and technology in support of U.S.

foreign policy objectives and the basic mission of NBS.

2.2. Technical Activities

2.2.1. United States Participation in OIML

In carrying out the Bureau's assigned task of managing United States

participation in OIML, the Office of Domestic and International Measurement

Standards plans and directs a variety of activities intended to maintain a strong U.S. presence in OIML. Of priority effort is the development of positions

(including preparing and accrediting delegations to OIML technical meetings)

which satisfy U.S. interests as regards:

a. the identification of opportunities for U.S. measurement practices

to be embodied in OIML International Recommendations;

b. the prevention of impediments to U.S. trade that can result from

restrictive technical or administrative requirements in International

Recommendations

c. the development of International Recommendations which accommodate

the reality of a decentralized system of legal metrology such as found in

the United States (Europeans generally assume a centralized legal metrology

system); and, as regards

47
d. the development of sound management and administrative policies

which will ensure that OIML operates as a viable international organization and that it effectively coordinates its aims and objectives with

those of other international organizations (BIPM, ISO, IEC) having similar

objecti ves.

United States presence in OIML is geared to strong technical level

participation in almost half of its 200 committees and subcommittees (called

Pilot and Reporting Secretariats), that are studying measurement problems and

that are preparing solutions to such problems in the form of model technical

regulations proposed for adoption as International Recommendations. U.S.

participation in OIML generally takes one of three forms:

a. Nation in Charge of a Secretariat

This commits the U.S. to form a national committee to study a particular

measurement problem; to develop a first draft International Recommendation on the subject; and, to assume leadership in working with other interested OIML

nations to move the draft International Recommendation to final adoption. The

U.S. administers twenty-nine (29) such secretariats at present and ODIMS is

responsible for organizing and monitoring the progress of the work of these

secretariats in behalf of the U.S. Appointing technical advisors to direct

the work; assisting in organizing National Working Groups; contacting affected

industry groups. Federal agencies, standards bodies, and State and local agencies;

translating of documents; scheduling of international meetings; and, accrediting

U.S. delegations to such meetings are typical activities carried out by ODIMS in

directing this work.

b. Collaborating Nation Participating in the Work of an OIML Secretariat

Administered by Another Nation

This commits the U.S. to active participation in the development of an International Recommendation for a given topic area including attendance at

international meetings, commenting on the technical adequacy of prepared

drafts, and voting. At present, the U.S. collaborates in the work of

approximately seventy (70) such OIML Pilot and Reporting Secretariats. ODIMS

manages this activity by receiving all drafts sent to the U.S. for comment,

identifying appropriate technical experts to review such drafts, undertaking

translations of documents where necessary, assembling, and coordinating U.S,

positions where appropriate, and forwarding such positions to the respective

OIML secretariat. When appropriate ODIMS staff play a direct or leading role

in reviewing drafts, generating U.S. positions, and in serving on U.S. delegations.

When international meetings are scheduled, ODIMS assembles, accredits, briefs

and debriefs U.S. delegations to such meetings.

c. National Representative in OIML Plenary Meetings and Conferences

The U.S. is an active member of the International Committee of Legal

Metrology (CIML), the body that oversees and directs the technical program

of OIML. Dr. Arthur McCoubrey, NML Associate Director for Measurement

Services, is the U.S. Representative to this body. The CIML meets at

least every eighteen months. The actions taken by the CIML do not obligate

its members under the OIML Convention. The U.S. also participates as a full -voting member in meetings of the International Conference of Legal

Metrology, which sets policy for OIML, adopts a quadrennial budget, and

48
officially sanctions International Recommendations as final documents.

The International Conference meets every four years and its decisions

obligate member nations under the Convention. ODIMS oversees the

development of U.S. positions to be taken during these plenary meetings.

In carrying out these activities ODIMS works with the U.S. Advisory

Committee for International Legal Metrology, with the various U.S.

technical advisors and interest groups that have provided input to U.S.

positions, and with the Department of State.

2.2.2. Coordinating NML Involvement in Domestic and International Voluntary

Standards Activities

Twenty-three percent of the professional staff of the National Measurement

Laboratory (NML) hold memberships in standards-wri ting activities of national

and international organizations, both in the private sector and in government.

These memberships are distributed among 62 U.S. (private sector and governmental)

organizations and 21 international (voluntary and intergovernmental ) organizations.

NBS has tradi tional ly been involved in standardization activities for a variety

of reasons:

1. Staff scientists recognize standards as important delivery mechanisms

for their research programs;

2. Standards committees bring together a core competence of technical and

scientific interests from various institutions and segments of the economy that

provide NBS scientists and programs valuable external linkage; and,

3. Standards organizations recognize the technical strength and objectivity

of NBS scientists and actively seek their participation as an important balance

between private sector and government interests.

The policy of the Bureau is that participation in outside standardization

activities is a decision that rests with line managers (Division Chiefs).

Memberships on standards committees must be mission-related and the Division

Chief, in approving such memberships, signifies that resources are available

for maintaining an adequate level of participation. The role played by ODIMS,

therefore, is not one of centrally managing standards committee memberships, but one of supporting NML management through the following means:

1. Assessing the impacts of proposed external standards programs and

policies and recommending NML responses to such initiatives;

2. Maintaining a complete and accurate data base on standards committee

assignments within NML;

3. Maintaining contact with standards organizations of importance to

NML programs; and,

4. Providing advice, as needed, to NML managers and participants on standardization matters.

49
2.2.3. Supporting Bilateral and Multilateral Scientific and Technological

Programs for NML Cooperation with Foreign Institutions

As the principal scientific and technical measurement laboratory in the

United States, MBS is highly regarded both nationally and internationally

for its competence, mission, and accomplishments. Much of NBS ' good

reputation internationally comes from active staff participation in international programs and forums. Benefits of these activities accrue to NBS

and its staff through associated development of strong individual and

institutional relationships and thereby strengthen NBS' national and international role in standardization.

International activities of NBS and the staff can be roughly categorized

as follows:

t International Organizations . NBS staff widely participate in international topical conferences, meetings of scientific and technical organizations,

and standards-writing organizations. Personal contacts in these forums often

lead to frequent direct communications, visits, and collaborative working

arrangements. At NBS, the Guest Worker Program facilitates long-term collaborative

work assignments for foreign scientists and engineers.

• Bilateral and Multilateral Agreements . On behalf of the United States,

the State Department maintains bilateral agreements and multilateral treaties

in science and technology with many nations. NBS participates in several of

these arrangements that afford international contacts for the staff. For

example, NBS is the designated representative of the United States in the

Treaty of the Meter that has more than 40 other member nations as signatories.

Bilateral scientific and technical agreements in which NBS has actively

participated include those with Canada, Japan, France, Germany, Italy, the

United Kingdom, Australia, Mexico, Spain, and Brazil. NBS represents the

United States in the U.S./U.S.S.R. Working Group for Metrology which comes

under the broad agreement in science and technology between the U.S. and

the Soviet Union. Recently, a bilateral agreement in metrology was signed

by the U.S. and the People's Republic of China and is expected to call forth

specific activity by NBS and counterpart PRC institutions. Bilateral agreements are under negotiation individually with Yugoslavia and Hungary. The

Yugoslav agreement is expected to strengthen and expand existing cooperative

programs between NBS and Yugoslav institutions.

• Technical Assistance . Other agency support has been given to NBS by

the Agency for International Development (AID) for infrastructure development

in standardization for developing countries. In particular, AID has funded

NBS programs for conducting workshops, surveys, seminars, and training in

standardization for representatives from developing countries. Standards

institutions in Korea and Brazil supported by AID funding have sought and

obtained long-term training assignments at NBS. ODIMS, in cooperation with

the Egyptian National Institute for Standards (NIS), has developed an NBS

proposal to AID for assisting NIS over a 5-year period beginning in FY 81.

• Grants . NBS has taken the opportunity to seek and apply funds under

the Special Foreign Currency Program (SFCP; PL-480). These funds have been

used in several countries to support projects that complement or supplement

ongoing programs at NBS. To date, SFCP projects have been established in

Egypt, India, Israel, Pakistan, Poland, and Yugoslavia. Funds are no longer

available in Israel, Poland, or Yugoslavia but bilateral agreements have

succeeded the SFCP in all three nations. ODIMS was instrumental in establishing

5 new NBS/SFCP projects in Egypt during 1979.

50
The NBS Associate Director for International Affairs has administrative

and oversight responsibil ity for the whole range of foreign relations

activities of the Bureau staff. ODIMS mainly provides assistance to MBS

Management and staff in developing and coordinating bilateral and multilateral programs of interest to NML scientists and programs. Most of these

programs generally require negotiations both within the United States and

in other countries. Within the U.S., the State Department and other Federal

agencies are often involved. In other countries, counterpart governmental

agencies and scientific and technical institutions need to be consulted.

Centralized staff support for MML in ODIMS provides an efficient and effective

means for maximizing benefits to NBS through such agreements. Sometimes

circumstances will dictate that it is more appropriate to involve NML staff

outside ODIMS in establishing foreign agreements; however, ODIMS must still

maintain pertinent information on Bureau policy and internal resources for

guiding effective negotiations. Other important services of ODIMS in this

regard are in putting together proposals for both grants and other agency

funding for foreign assistance programs.

3 . Highl ights for FY 80

3.1. USA Participation in the International Organization of Legal Metrology

(OIML)

3.1.1. Sixth International Conference of Legal Metrology

The Sixth International Conference of Legal Metrology was held June 16-20,

1980, in Washington, D.C. with the United States as host government.

Of the 46 member nations of OIML, 34 sent delegations. Three correspondi ng

member nations and fourteen international organizations were represented by

observers. Additionally, Canada and the People's Republic of China, who are

in the process of joining OIML, sent delegations to observe. The United States

delegation consisted of the following persons:

Dr. Edward L. Brady, NBS, Head of Delegation

Dr. Arthur 0. McCoubrey, NBS, USA Representative to CIML

Mr. David E. Edgerly, MBS, member

Mr. Charles H. Vincent, NCWM, member

Mr. Daryl Tonini, Scale Manufacturers Association, member

Mr. Frank Lancetti , State Department, member

From a business standpoint, the Conference reached agreement on all of

the major points of its agenda. Discussions were for the most part meaningful,

to the point, and free of "political" overtones. The International Bureau of

Legal Metrology (BIML), as secretariat of the Conference, and the various

member nation delegates, seemed very well pleased with the physical arrangements and with the social amenities provided by the United States as host

country.

The objectives of the USA delegation were not fully realized in the results

of the Conference. There were disappointments in not being able to resolve

technical problems in the standards dealing with fluid meters and fluid metering

systems and with high speed weighing systems used in packaging processes for a wide variety of commercial products. As a result, these standards were approved

51
by OIML with technical requirements different from USA practices and serious

enough to result in trade problems. NBS in concert with industry is continuing

efforts to ameliorate these technical problems and is hopeful that compromises

can be found. It is clear, however, that the USA is still somewhat disadvantaged

in OIML because of the unanimity with which Common Market members speak on technical

matters. Experts from the nine countries of the EEC (the same experts that sit

as country reps in OIML) meet often to discuss and resolve measurement problems

as part of the Common Market technical directives program designed to foster

free trade within the Community. Because there are only nine nations as opposed

to 46 in OIML, the EEC can generally move quickly in resolving problems and we frequently face situations in OIML where EEC countries are unwilling to listen

and accept technical solutions to measurement problems because a different solution

has already been decided within the Community. Accordingly, the United States

is forced to negotiate technical problems on two fronts - within OIML and,

indirectly as mentioned above, within the Common Market. Progress is being made,

but it will require continued, strong pursuit of technical objectives by NBS in

concert with private industry.

3.1.2. USA Initiative on Electronics

In July 1980, the United States circulated within OIML a first pre-draft

International Recommendation on Electronic Weighing Devices. The draft was developed within a relatively short time frame in order to take advantage

of the opportunity presented by the inability of the EEC to resolve differences

of opinion regarding the need for requirements pertaining to the "self checking"

of electronic devices. The OIML draft now being circulated for comment resolves

the issue of "self checking" in the following manner:

" General Provisions for Metrological Integrity

Electronic weighing devices or main elements shall have the

metrological integrity required for the use to which they are intended. This integrity may be achieved by one of the following

methods

:

° By a design and construction that will result in devices and

elements which conform to requisite standards of performance

which can be predicted by means of tests specified in this

recommendation.

° By incorporating checking facilities in the device or element

which will detect and indicate a lack of metrological integrity,

as verified by means of tests specified in this recommendation.

0 By a combination of these methods.

The choice of one of these methods is left to the applicant."

The underlying principle is that whether or not an electronic element

contains a self checking device or devices, the element or weighing device shall

be tested in like manner and under identical conditions. It is hoped that this

approach will be successful within OIML and will eventually be accepted as the

basis for an EEC Directive. A meeting of the OIML International Working Group on electronic weighing devices will be held in Paris in March 1981, to review the

proposed International Recommendation. It is expected that representati ves of

the EEC will take an active part in that meeting.

52
3.1.3. Approved Work Plans for OIML PS17 - "Measurement of Pollution"

and for PS20 "Prepackaged Products"

As the secretariat nation responsible for both PS 1 7 on pollution and for

PS20 on prepackaged products, the United States submitted proposed work plans

for both secretariats to the International Committee of Legal Metrology (CIML)

during its meeting in Washington this past June. Both work plans were accepted

by the CIML.

PS17, on pollution measurement, will consist of the following Reporting

Secretariats

RS 1 - Measurement of pollutants in air

RS 2 - Measurement of pollutants in water

RS 3 - Measurement of radionuclide radiation

RS 4 - Measurement of pesticides and toxic substances

RS 5 - Measurement of noise pollution

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will establish and manage

the National Working Group responsible for operating the Pilot Secretariat.

RS 1, dealing with air pollution, will be the responsi bi 1 i ty of the Federal

Republic of Germany which also has responsibility for the ISO air pollution

secretariat (IS0/TC146). RS3, dealing with radiation, will be the responsibility

of the United Kingdom. Responsibility for the other Reporting Secretariats has

not yet been decided. The first Pilot Secretariat 17 International Working

Group meeting will be held April 7-10, 1981, in Paris, at which time all

interested OIML member nations and a number of liaison international organizations involved in the pollution field will get together to discuss priorities

of activity within PS17. The work is considered to be of extreme importance to

many OIML nation governments who are now involved in establishing performance

standards for pollution monitoring instrumentation.

PS20, on prepackaged products, will consist of the following Reporting

Secretariats

RS 1 - Information on package labels

RS 2 - Metrological assurance of package quantity of contents declarations.

The U.S. National Working Group, which will be responsible for operating

the Pilot Secretariat, is in the process of being established by ODIMS. It

will consist of representatives of FDA, FTC, USDA, State and local weights and

measures officials, and private industry. RS 1, dealing with package labelling

requirements , will be the responsibility of the Federal Republic of Germany.

RS 2, dealing with methods for determining the accuracy of net quantity of

contents declarations through statistical sampling means, will be the responsibility of Switzerland. The Swiss have just circulated a draft OIML International

Recommendation on statistical sampling of prepackaged products. This draft will

be reviewed by the United States and by other OIML member nations. An international meeting to discuss the draft will probably take place in 1981.

53
3.1.4. Draft OIML International Recommendations Reviewed by the United States

During FY 80

Secretariat Title of Document and Responsible Nation

PS4/RS1

PS4/RS3

PS4/RS5

PS4/RS5

End Standards of Length (USSR)

Instruments for Measurement of Length (France)

Hierarchial System for Angle Measuring Instruments (Poland)

Methods of Reproduction and Transmission of Plane Angle

Units (Poland)

PS4/RS7

PS5/RS1

3

Geometric Metrology Dictionary (Poland)

Meters for Liquids (other than water) with Measuring

Chambers (FRG/France)

PS5/RS1

3

Volume Meter Equipped Measuring Assemblies for Liquids Other

Than Water. Chapter 1: General Provisions (FRG/France)

PS5/RS1

3

Volume Meter Equipped Measuring Assemblies for Liquids Other

Than Water: Chapters II and III. (FRG/France)

PS7/RS4 Technical Regulation of Mon-Automatic Weighing Machines

(France/FRG)

PS7/RS5

PS7/RS5

PS8/RS5

Continuous Totalising Weighing Machines (Great Britain)

Checkweighing and Weight Grading Machines (Great Britain)

Hexagonal Weights, Ordinary Accuracy Class, From 100 g to

20 kg (Belgium/Great Britain)

PS10/RS2 Speedometers, Mechanical Odometers, and Chronotachygraphs

for Automobiles - Metrological Regulations (Poland)

PS11/RS4 Indicating Pressure Gauges - Vacuum Gauges and Pressure - Vacuum Gauges (USSR)

PS11/RS4 Recording Pressure Gauges - Vacuum Gauges and Pressure - Vacuum Gauges (USSR)

PS11/RS4 Metrological Characteristics of Elastic Sensing Elements

Used in Measurement of Pressure. Determination of Methods

PS11/RS7

PS13/RS7

(USSR)

Barometers (UK)

Terminology Concerning the Measurement of Electrical and

Magnetic Quantities (Democratic Republic of Germany)

PS21/RS1 Standardized Metrological Characteri sties of Measuring

Instruments (USSR)

PS21/RS2 Standardized Metrological Characteri sties of Dynamic

Properties of Measuring Instruments (USSR)

PS21/RS4 Metrological Characteri sties of Measuring Systems:

Regulation Principles (USSR)

PS21/RS5 Requirements for the Methods of Control of Metrological

Characteristics of Measuring Instruments (USSR)

PS22/RS1 Fields of Use of Measuring Instruments Subject to

Mandatory Verification (FRG)

PS22/RS2 Principles for the Selection of Parameters and Characteristics

PS22/RS5

PS23/RS1

for the Examination of Working Measuring Instruments

(Democratic Republic of Germany)

Principles of Metrological Supervision (Czechoslovakia)

Metrological Characteristics of Standards and Calibration

Devices (Czechoslovakia)

PS23/RS2 Principles of Approval, Conservation and Use of Standards

(Czechoslovakia)

54
Secretariat Title of Document and Responsible Nation

PS23/RS3

PS23/RS4

PS23/RS5

PS26/RS4

PS26/RS4

PS27/RS1

PS27/RS3

PS27/RS5

PS30/RS1

PS30/RS2

Documentation for Standards (Czechoslovakia)

Methods of Certification of Verification Devices (FRG)

Principles for the Establishment of Hierarchy Scheme for

Measuring Instruments (France)

El ectrocardiographs : Methods and Means of Verification

(USSR)

Electroencephalographs: Methods and Means of Verification

(USSR)

Legal Certified Reference Materials, Terms, and Definitions.

(USSR)

Legal Certified Reference Materials Metrological Characteristics

General Concepts and Standardization (USSR)

Legal Certified Reference Materials. General Principles

for Application (USSR)

pH Scale for Aqueous Solutions (USSR)

Standard Solutions Reproducing Conductivity of Electrolytes

(USSR)

3.1.5. OIML Meeti nqs Attended by United States Delegations During FY 80

Date Committee Title Place

Oct. 79 PS5/RS1

6

Water Meters Tel Aviv, Isra

Nov. 79 PS26 Measuring Instruments Used in the Field of

Public Health

FRG

Nov. 79 PS5/RS20 Verification Devices for Liquid Measuring

Instruments and Their Calibration

Tokyo, Japan

March 80 - Ad Hoc Working Group on OIML Certification

System

Paris, France

March 80 PS22 Principles of Metrological Control Paris, France

j

March 80 PS22/RS1 Fields of Use and Nomenclature of Instruments Subject to Periodic Verification

Paris, France

^

March 80 PS22/RS6 Principles Making Possible Assurance of

Effectiveness of Metrological Control

Paris, France

March 80 - Planning Meeting for Sixth International

Conference of Legal Metrology

Paris, France

April 80 PS26/RS4 Bio-electrical Measuring Instruments Kislovodsk, US

April 80 PS21/RS1 Standardized Metrological Characteri sties Tallin, USSR

U

of Measuring Instruments While Measuring

Quantities Constant in Time
Date Committee Title Place

April 80 PS21/RS2 Standardized Metrological Characteristics

of Measuring Instruments While Measuring

Quantities Varying With Time

Tallin, USSR

May 80

June 80

June 80

PS1/RS1 Vocabulary of Legal Metrology, Fundamental

Terms

Paris, France

17th Meeting of the International Committee Washington, D.C.

of Legal Metrology

Sixth International Conference of Legal

Metrology

Washington, D.C.

Sept. 80 PS5/RS1

6

Water Meters Paris, France

(International meetings where USA participated as 0IML observer or representative.

)

Feb. 80

June 80

ISO/TCI 64/SCI Uniaxial Testing Machines

International Electrotechnical Commission

General Meeting

Paris, France

Stockholm, Sweder

Sept. 80

Sept. 80

ISO/TCI 64/ SCI Uniaxial Testing Machines

I EC/TCI 3/ SCB Electrical Measuring Instruments

Boras, Sweden

Palo Alto,

Cal ifornia

3.2. Coordinating NML Involvement in Domestic and International Voluntary

Standards Activities

3.2.1. 0MB Circular A- 119 "Federal Participation in Voluntary Standards"

and Proposed Procedures for Listing Voluntary Standards Bodies

The Office of Management and Budget Circular A- 1 1 9 , issued January 17,

1980, sets government policy for Federal participation in the development

and application of voluntary standards (copy attached as Appendix G-7). The

Circular encourages Federal employee participation in and Agency support of

voluntary standards bodies which conduct their standards activities in accordance with the eleven due process and other criteria contained in A- 119. The

Circular charges the Secretary of Commerce with the responsibility for

developing and maintaining '-current a list of voluntary standards bodies which

indicate a desire to be listed and which certify to the Secretary that they

are in compliance with the due process and other criteria contained in A- 119.

Further, the Circular requires that voluntary standards bodies must be listed

as a precondition to Federal participation unless such participation is required

by law. Pursuant to his responsibilities under A-119, the Secretary of

Commerce published on June 2, 1980, proposed rules regarding the listing of

voluntary standards bodies (copy attached as Appendix G-8). The comment period

for the proposed listing procedures ended on September 2, 1980. An informal

hearing on the procedures was held August 27 at the Department of Commerce,

during which witnesses from thirteen (13) private sector organizations testified

(largely in opposition) to the proposed rules.

56
3.2.2. NML Policy on High-Impact Standards Issues

In connection with a recent review of MOU standards committee participation

management. Dr. Ambler and the MBS Executive Board asked the NBS Standardization

Advisory and Coordination Committee (SACC) to develop specific recommendations

for treating standards-rel ated issues which, for one reason or another, need

higher level management attention than is normally required. Based upon a report

by SACC to the Executive Board, criteria for identifying high impact standards

activities were recommended and approved, and NML instituted a new policy,

effective in July, for treating high-impact standards activities. It was agreed

that a standards issue should be judged "high-impact" if one or more of the

following criteria are met:

a. ) It may be brought to the attention of the NBS Director, the Assistant

Secretary, or the Secretary by one or more outside groups, such as Congress, a trade association, an industrial firm, or an influential individual.

b. ) It contains the potential for outside criticism, positive or negative, of

NBS by credible persons or organizations. Whether such a potential exists may not

always be obvious. However, the judgment of the person closest to the issue - that is, the NBS staff member participating in the standards committee, etc., -

i s usual ly rel iable.

c. ) It requires broad coordination across laboratory or agency boundaries.

In many cases, coordination with one or two persons will be all that is necessary;

this can readily be handled by the individual participant. In other cases,

coordination, or resolution of differing positions, may require the involvement

of higher level management.

d. ) It generates a need for policy guidance regarding appropriate limits of

NBS responsibility, whether technical or financial.

e. ) It would have a significant impact (positive or negative) on the

U.S. industrial position in an area where technology is moving rapidly.

As part of the NML policy regarding high-impact standards activities, ODIMS • will meet at least annually with NBS Division Chiefs to review standards activities

as a means of verification of committee participation for the NBS-wide Standards

Information System and as a means of ensuring continued awareness of the policies

regarding high-impact issues.

3.2.3. American National Standards Institute Service Fee System

NBS recently completed its negotiations with ANSI regarding the payment

of fees for NBS staff members serving on various committees and activities within

the structure of the new ANSI Service Fee System. A contract was drawn and

payment of some $10,000 to ANSI was approved by NBS. As part of the contract,

NBS will become an organizational member of ANSI.

57
3.3. Supporting Bilateral and Multilateral Scientific and Technological

Programs for NML Cooperation with Foreign Institutions

3.3.1. U. S. /Yugoslav Cooperative S&T Agreement

a. Staff attended the U.S. /Yugoslav Joint Board meeting in Belgrade from

December 3-6, 1979. At that time, a proposal was presented of 14 cooperative

projects between NBS and Yugoslav institutions. This amounted to about $130K of

the $1M available for the first year of the program (1980).

b. Staff attended the meeting on April 8-11, 1980, at the U.S. Department

of State of the U.S. /Yugoslav Joint Board where the NBS proposal was approved.

Other proposals for future cooperation were also presented at that time.

c. The cooperative S&T program was approved by the Yugoslav government in

July 1980 and is now in effect.

d. A total 1981 budget for the Cooperation is expected to be about $2.4M

of which NBS may obtain about 13%. NBS is preparing proposals for consideration

at the Joint Board meeting that is to take place in November 1980.

3.3.2. NBS Special Foreign Currency Program (SFCP) Projects in Egypt

Five NBS SFCP projects developed by the staff with project-level manager's

support were approved through DoC and State Department in October - November 1980.

These projects are for three years and will amount to a total of approximately

$400K.

3.3.3. Technical Assistance Programs

a. Staff attended a meeting from February 25-26, of the U.S. /Egyptian Joint

Consultative Committee (JCC) to the U.S. Agency for International Development (AID)

on their Applied Science and Technology Project with the Egyptian Academy for

Scientific Research and Technology (ASRT). At this meeting a proposal to AID

was discussed for the funding of an NBS assistance program for Egyptian standards

institutions, namely the National Institute for Standards (NIS) and the Egyptian

Organization for Standardization (EOS). The proposed project had been discussed

at meetings of the JCC held during the previous one and one half years.

b. Prior and subsequent to the February JCC meeting, Egyptian visitors were

accommodated for two weeks each from both NIS (February 1980) and EOS (March 1980).

The visitors toured the NBS laboratories in both Gaithersburg and Boulder and

focused on possible specific areas of cooperation.

c. In May 1980, the staff participated in a visit to Egyptian institutions

to sharpen a specific program for assistance to Egypt in standardization. The

result was a specific proposal to AID in June 1980 and the identification of

possible cooperative-assistance projects with EOS and NIS.

d. An NBS project with ASRT has been reviewed by AID and is expected to be

approved shortly. The total level of support is expected to be about $1.6M for

three years. From 8-10 projects will be carried out each year and equally divided

between NIS and EOS. More specifics will be worked out by the staff and other

NBS visits to Egypt before the beginning of the program in about January 1981.

58
3.3.4.

Meetings in Support of Bilateral Science and Technology Agreements

Joint U.S. /Yugoslav Board Meeting Dec. 3-6, 1979 Belgrade, Yugoslavia

Joint II. S. /Yugoslav Board Meeting Apr. 8-11, 1980 Washington, D.C.

3.3.5. Meetings in Support of Technical Assistance Programs

Joint U. S. /Egyptian Consultative Feb. 25-26, 1980 Washington, D.C.

Committee on Applied Science and

Technology Research Program

Meeting with Officials of Egyptian May 15-26, 1980 Cairo, Egypt

National Institute for Standards

and Egyptian Organization for

Standardization and Quality

Control

3.3.6. Special Publications

Sixth International Conference of Legal Metrology, June 16-20, 1980, Washington,

D.C. - General Information , May 1980, French and English.

Report to the Advisory Committee for International Legal Metrology on the

17th Meeting of the International Committee of Legal Metrology on the 6th

International Conference of Legal Metrology Sponsored by the International

Organization of Legal Metrology , August 1980.

Report of the United States Delegation to the Sixth International Conference

of Legal Metrology, June 16-20, 1980 , July 1980.

3.3.7.

Invited Talks

October 1979 "Prospects for a Model Program for Realization of Traceability

in Low-Level Radioactivity Measurements" - Internati onal

Committee on Radionuclide Measurements Meeting - Braunschweig, FRG.

October 1979 "MTN Standards Code and 0IML" - Health Industries Manufacturers

Association Meeting - Washington, D.C.

November 1979 " International Standards - Their Increased Importance to the

U.S." - 6th Annual AAMI/FDA Conference on Medical Device

Regulation - Washington, D.C.

March 1980 "MTN Standards Code and Trade Agreements Act of 1979" - Annual

Meeting of the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory

Standards - Cherry Hill, NJ

.

April 1980 "MTN Standards Code and Trade Agreements Act of 19/9" - Annual

Meeting of the Scale Manufacturers Association - Ponte Vedra, FL.

September 1980 "Implications of United States Participation in the International

Organization of Legal Metrology (0IML)" - Annual Meeting of the

National Conference of Standards Laboratories - Washington, D.C.

59


APPENDIX 1

DRAFT PLAN

for

TRAINING AND EDUCATION

PROGRAMS

in

MEASUREMENT SCIENCE

Updated: February 22, 1980

July 8, 1980

August 29, 1980
Measurement practice today must be a professional

service, for it requires quality training as an essential to acquiring and maintaining the

specialized skills of those engaged in this most

demanding occupation . . . training programs must

be expanded in line with authority in the various

laws and regulations and the challenges and

opportunities derived from science and technology.

Albert D. Tholen

Chief, Office of Weights and Measures

1.2
CONTENTS

Part I, General 1

Background 1 Objectives 1 Scope 2

Potential Subjects 3

Part II, On-The-Job Training 4

Part III, National Training Program 5

History 6

Objectives 6

Implementation 7

Related Tasks 8

Training Manuals 8

Certification 9

Existing Regional Groups 9

Proposed Regional Groups 9

Conclusion 10

Part IV, University Based Programs 11

General 12

Approach 12

Prerequisites 12

Procedure 12

Tasks 14

Related Activities _ 18

Publicity 19

Draft Schedules 23

Technical Training Program in Measurement Practice 26

Higher Education Program in Measurement Science 24

Part V, Environmental 32

Part VI, Health and Safety 33

Part VII, Industrial Metrology 34

Part VIII, Engineering Metrology 35

1 .3
DRAFT PLAN FOR TRAINING AND EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS

in

MEASUREMENT SCIENCE

BACKGROUND

General

This paper is the proposed plan designed to result in the development

and implementation of training and education programs in measurement

science. Several organizations are addressing the perceived need for

improved competence and proficiency in the measurement sciences as applied to research, government, and industry at the professional and

technical levels.

The measurement practitioner (whether a scientist, engineer, technician,

or manager) is faced with a technical environment growing more complex

and interdisci pi inary.

As a result of this perceived need, the Directorate of Measurement Services

explored the potential benefits, feasibility, and implementation problems

in the use of university capabilities to extend State metrology services.

Mr. Albert Tholen was assigned as the DMS staff person to explore this

subject. An investigation of methods to upgrade the skills and knowledge

of the State personnel (which would not likely exist unless new programs were developed and used) was undertaken.

Initial explorations were directed to State 1 aboratories . It was soon realized that private and-other governmental laboratories were _ concerned about the same subject. At this time, and as reflected in

this Plan, the need for new training and educational programs are being

pursued across a broad range of measurement science needs in government

and industry focused by such groups as the National Conference of Standards

Laboratories (NCSL), the National Conference on Weights and Measures

(NCWM), and the American Society for Quality Control (ASQC).

OBJECTIVES OF TRAINING AND EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS

A. Enhance the quality and quantity of personnel skills in measurement

sciences relative to:

(1) Legal metrology

(2) Technical metrology

( 3 ) Qual i ty assurance

(4) Standardization

(5) Research and Development
B. Improve the functional level and image of the measurement science.

C. Generate benefits through:

(1) Reduced inflation (cost of measurement, efficiency of enforcement,

reduction of scrappage, increased productivity)

(2) Conservation of energy

(3) Improvement of customer protection

(4) Expedite commercial transactions in international trade

D. A curriculum with mul ti disci pi ine foundation to prepare students

for:

(1) Functioning in a productive role based on state-of-the-art

technology

(2) Developing and/or utilizing tomorrow's technology

SCOPE OF PROGRAM

Currently, organizations surveyed depend on a variety of methods for

training and education which include:

a. Internal Training Programs

b. On-the-job Training , c. National Bureau of Standards

? d. Professional Society Short Courses ^

e. Books/Magazines, Literature

f. Professional Society Conferences

g. Universi ty/col 1 eges

J

h. Government Seminars

i. Self-study Courses

j. Manufacturer Training

k. Technical school s4

l. Consultants

This plan addresses c, d, g, and k primarily.

The program is intended for:

a. Administrators;

b. Inspectors;

c. Servicemen;

d. Metrologists; and

c. Business men, who are working for:

a. State and local governments;

b. Industry and business;

c. Federal Government; and

d. Foreign government, and

'Office of Weights and Measures (Commercial Trade)

2 Institute for Weights and Measures

3 . University of Texas at Dallas (future possibility)

Texas Engineering Extension Service (future possibility)
involving:

a. Legal Metrology - commercial trade,

environmental, and

health and safety;

b. Industrial Metrology; and

c. Engineering Metrology.

POTENT I At

Subjects :

Fundamentals

Base and Derived Units

Statistics, Sampling

Quality Assurance

Inspecti on Basics, Accuracy, Precision

Specifications, Codes

Requi remen ts

Devi ces Commodi ti es Variable Frequency

Laws and Regulations

Equi ty

Uni formi ty

Fraud

Inforcement

Prosecution

Organi zati on Goals, Objectives

Program Evaluation (justification)

Budgeting, Financial Management

Records

Techni cal

Mass and Density

Volume and caoacity

Length, Angle, Form

Electri cal

Time and Frequency

Temperature

Pressure

Radi ati on Weighing Devices

Measuring Devices
PART II

ON-THE-JOB-TRAINING

[not addressed in this plan at this time]

1 .7
PART III

NATIONAL TRAINING PROGRAM

Training for a new weights and measures inspector

resembles the training formerly given a new police

officer -- next to none --

The inspector is given a book of local laws.

Handbook 44, a set of field weights, and sent

out to do his job.

A1 bert Thol en Chief, Office of Weights and Measures
HISTORY

The United States is the only country in the world in which weights and measures enforcement is not a Federal function but a State and local

responsi bi li ty . With this system, the need for central coordination and

direction is obvious. The National Bureau of Standards (NBS), through

the Office of Weights and Measures (OWM) , serves State and local weights

and measures officials much as a trade association serves its membership.

Weights and measures officials must rely on the NBS to furnish needed

interpretations and explanations of National Conference Laws and Regulations

which serve as the basis for uniform control throughout the U.S. The

OWM staff members serve as staff assistants to the various standing

committees of the Conference and consequently this information is not

available elsewhere. The control of new technology in the form of

electronics, digital indicators, and computers facing the weights and measures officials today make assistance from the National Bureau of

Standards essential.

Each State today has a weights and measures law, most of which are patterned after the Model Weights and Measures Law developed by the

National Conference. Mississippi was the last State to enact their law

in 1966. The enactment of uniform laws and regulations are the direct

result of the Office of Weights and Measures training effort. The

training program serves as a catalyst for adoption of uniform laws and

procedures and has been cited as an outstanding example of Federal-State

cooperation in a vital area of commerce.

The benefactors of the program in addition to the more than 3,000 weights

and measures officials include manufacturers, service personnel, users,

and consumers as a result of a fair and equitable marketplace.

In recent efforts to broaden the impact of the program and to spread our

limited resources further, industry service personnel have been invited

to participate in our seminars, both as instructors and students. An

effort is also being made to group adjoining States together where

possible to form regional training groups. Four such regional groups

exist today in the Northeast, Southeast, Northwest, and Southwest.

Under this plan, a different State in each group hosts the seminar each

year with all of their field staff participating and as many officials

as possible from the other States in the region. Industry officials

with national responsibility have been willing to participate in assigned

specific areas as instructors in our regional seminars.

OBJECTIVES

1. To develop and conduct a nationwide training program that will

offer OWM training on a completely equitable basis to al

1

of the

State and local jurisdictions. In the past OWM training has been

conducted on an "as requested" basis with some of the jurisdictions

receiving training each year and others receiving little or no training. This type of program is not considered to be making the

best use of our resources and has not produced the desired results

on a nationwide basis.
2. To seek the help and support of the National Conference Committee

on Education, Administration, and Consumer Affairs in implementing

and gaining Conference endorsement of this program.

The OWM training program is of vital interest and concern to the

committee and has been discussed at length during recent Committee

meetings. All involved agree that OWM can spread their resources further by grouping States together into regional groups for the

purpose of training and including local scale and meter service

personnel as participants. The Committee has also endorsed the

practice of including industry officials as instructors in certain

specific areas.

3. Seek the help and support of the four regional conference committees

on education on a continuing basis to implement and improve the

program. Each of the regional committees (Northeast, Southern,

Northwest, and Western) will be asked to develop as a continuing

program the implementation of this program.

4. Promote a much closer working relationship between the National

Conference Committee on Education and the four regional conference

committees in all areas of mutual interest such as the National

Training Program, Weights and Measures Program Evaluation, and

National Weights and Measures Week.

The regional committees can provide a valuable and necessary service

to their respective memberships and assist in promoting uniformity

nationally by working closely with the National Conference in these

important areas.

IMPLEMENTATION

Beginning in 1979, Mr. R. N. Smith, Manager of OWM Training and Staff

Assistant to the National Conference Committee on Education, Administration,

and Consumer Affairs will attend each of the four regional conferences

for the purpose of outlining the program and asking for assistance in

the following areas.

1. Ask each State in the- region to name a State Training Officer or other person to act as coordinator of training in the State and be

the OWM and Conference contact on all matters related to training.

This person would also manage continuing in-house training for

State and local officials in the State.

2. Assist OWM in forming regional State groups in those areas where

they do not already exist. See the following list of existing and

proposed groups. Linder this plan, one State in the regional group

agrees to host the training school each year on a rotating basis,

affording the opportunity for all of the host State officials to

attend and supervisory personnel from the other States in the

group. This plan will guarantee the opportunity for all officials

in each State in the group to attend periodically depending on the

si ze of the group.

1 .10
Existing Regional Groups

1. Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont

2. Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi, Georgia, Florida

3. Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Colorado

4. Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota

5. Utah, Arizona, New Mexico

6. Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Alaska

Proposed Regional Groups

7. Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island

8. Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio

9. Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia

10. North Carolina, South Carolina

11. Michigan, Indiana, Kentucky

12. Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois

13. Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana

14. Hawaii, California, Nevada

15. Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands

16. New Jersey, Delaware, District of Columbia

3. Assist OWM in developing State "Profiles" for each State in the

regional conference. These "Profiles" would contain information

regarding number of inspectors, level of enforcement activity,

testing standards and equipment, program areas, needs, and level of

training. This phase of the program will, of necessity, be conducted

on a continuing basis.

5. Work with OWM and the National Conference in developing uniform

"in-house" training programs for both new and experienced officials.

RELATED TASKS

Within this persDective, the following related tasks will be undertaken

by OWM/NBS:

1. Ascertain individual State training needs by formalizing a dossier

on each State containing:

a. organization and administration of State weights and measures

program

b. current needs and problems

c. training given by OWM

d. training available, exclusive of OWM

e. functional job description of weights and measures personnel

f. turnover rate for weights and measures personnel
2. Develop detailed course outline for all training programs and make

available to individual States and localities.

a. course content

b. visual aids

c. textual resources

3. Produce a complementary/exolanatory document to accompany Handbook

44.

4. Review all NBS published weights and measures material and recommend

retention, revision, or elimination.

5. Encourage States to develop incentive programs to motivate weights

and measures inspectors to seek training.

6. Develop and promote an examination (given through the NCWM) for

certification of weights and measures inspectors.

TRAINING MANUALS

Prepare three comprehensive training manuals to be used for: (a) an eight-week intensive inspector training program; (b) a four-week intensive

metrologists training program; (c) a two-week intensive administrators

training program. A training manual consists of a detailed course

syllabus and a textbook. Its preparation would be facilitated by referring

to the comparable training manual used by other Federal agencies such as the FBI, FDA, and OSHA. More useful would be the syllabi and textbooks

already prepared at some of the weights and measures jurisdictions.

Some of them are quite exceptional. (It should be remarked that the

need for a training manual applies with equal urgency to the ongoing OWM

training programs, especially for the metrologist and administrator

training.

)

CERTIFICATION

Work out an NBS certification program for new inspectors similar to that

for new metrologists.

There is no legal basis at present for the NCWM to formally certify an inspector; nevertheless, the prestige of the NCWM can be put to good use

by the inauguration of a certification program. It would give the NCWM

some measure of influence on the hiring policy of new inspectors by the

State and local jurisdictions. This, in turn, could tend to insure the

maintenance of some minimum qualification level for the new recruits

since juri sdictions may not wish to be identified as those having uncertified

or uncerti f iabl e inspectors.

What is more desirable is eventually to confer some legal sanction to

the certification of inspectors. One way to achieve this end would be

the adoption of a model code by the National Conference on Weights and

Measures.

1 .12
CONCLUSION

The total program, with expected cooperation from all involved, will be

completely operational by 1985 and should do much to upgrade and standardize

commercial weights and measures activity in the U.S. With rapidly

changing new technology and merchandising methods, ever changing and

expanded legal requirements, and the fact that we have over 700 independent

weights and measures jurisdictions in this country, makes it imperative

to develop a uniform level of training for all officials.
FART IV

UNIVERSITY BASED PROGRAMS

GENERAL

1 .14
This part of the Plan describes, first, the establishment of two programs based

in university or university related training organizations initiated by NBS:

1. Technical training program in measurement 1 practice, and

2. Higher education program in measurement science2

Second, it describes programs being explored and' developed primarily through the

efforts of individuals and groups other than MBS,

PROGRAMS INITIATED BY NBS

APPROACH

This part of the Plan proposes a four task program:

Task I Task II

Task III

Task IV

Planni ng

Decisi on Preparati on Implementation

The first three tasks extend from the- second half of FY 1979 through the

third quarter of FY 1982. Assuming successful completion of Tasks I through III; the first on-campus course work will commence in the fall

of CY 1982.

PREREQUISITES

The development of a Measurement Science Educational Program should have

the following prerequisites:

1. Establish that there is a need for a quality education program and

a sufficient number of potential students to support the program.

2. There should be a sincere desire on the part of decision makers to

provide a continuing program of education and training that will

offer career development opportunities for all personnel interested

in measurement science and related fields.

3. Industry must provide leadership for the program. (Assume that

educators are not aware of the technical requirements and skill

levels required. Stress the fact that measurement science is a set

of specialized disciplines in present day manufacturing, service,

and regulatory organizations.)

4. Encourage and enlist aid from other local technical societies in

related fields.

PROCEDURE TO ESTABLISH A COLLEGE PROGRAM

After the prerequisi tes have been considered, the following specific

procedures are planned to assure a well established educational program:

1. Conduct surveys to obtain data on local and national industry needs

for specific measurement science educational needs.

1 Texas Engineering Extension Service

2 University of Texas at Dallas

1 .15
2. Prepare educational program package papers for presentation to

college officials. Ensure that these presentations demonstrate the

followi ng:

a) The expected annual student enrollment.

b) Student sources.

c) Local industry management support*

d) Source of qualified instructors.

e) Program compatibility with college standards and facilities.

f) The present and future scope of the educational program.

3. Arrange initial meetings with top college officials such as the

heads of departments for the first presentations of the educational

program package. Sell the idea at the top. Obtain approval to

make follow up presentations to the department staff. Staff approval

is necessary.

4. Make department staff presentations. Thoroughly explain program

goals and technical requirements.

5. Arrange and conduct field trips for the school staff. Show them

just what people do in measurement science, and hew industry will

support your program.

6. Prepare course proposals using college proposal forms and procedures.

Ensure the backing of a specific college staff member appointed by

the department head.

7. Utilize local college vocational coordinators in assisting qualified

instructors in credential applications and establishment of course

schedules.

8. After instructors are approved by the Credential Board, the Advisory

Council assists in the testbook(s) selection and course outline

preparati on.

9. Submit all course outlines to the Coordinator of Measurement Science

Program for review by the State and local representati ves

.

10. Monitor each class with guidance from the school coordinator and

Advisory Council to ensure effective course material and instruction.

11. Periodically review and update course requirements to ensure current

measurement science needs are being fulfilled.

Toward the end of Task II, this Plan proposes the establishment of a committee to guide its development. Its objectives will be:

1. To recognize educational needs and requirements for existing and

potential employees in the fields of measurement science.

2. To coordinate with management in local industry and government

agencies to determine the scope and depth of educational programs.

1 .16
3. To coordinate with local colleges and universities in establishing

educational programs that support industry's and government's needs

for personnel trained in the latest concepts and techniques.

4. To provide support to local secondary and middle schools in guidance

and career awareness activities.

5. To provide support to local colleges and universities by selecting

courses, preparing or improving curriculum, selecting textbooks,

and recommending qualified instructors.

6. To work with the faculty and administration to insure proper identification of the courses within the college bulletin and identification

and credit of these courses within other but related occupational

fields.

7. To cooperate with the NCWM, NCSL, ASQC, and other associated professional

societies to promote professional development.

8. To communicate educational concepts through a program of public

relations and promotion.

TASKS (see attached schedule)

1.17
utvtLumtm

ur

ikaininu

ANU

EDUCATIONAL

PROGRAMS

IN

TASK i_

PLANNING

MEASUREMENT

SCIENCES oCO

<n

on

CM

05c

05oo

05

cn

on

CM

s03

O) >-

03U

VI

VI

S_

<u

4->s033

cr

T3

<ds-3

o*

O)i.

ra

s-05o

i-Q.

13

U1

«=c I—COocn

<13

4-5 <ao3

T3

ai 4-o VI

O) o

Q_ <D >>0

4-> 3

4U 4- V5 o

VI 03 E -r— i- +-> aj 3

4-> cd

4-5 c o

•i- a.

T3 4-

O)O

O)c s_

CD a) jd

4-> E

03 3 E 3

4-j -a

V5 3

LU 03

V53o3

4-5

4-5 VIc

-ao

03

V5

aj

4—5 <Uoo

V5 4-O

03

4-5 V5c

a> T33

03

a>05

03

s_3o

CJc uo

03

4-5

CJc

03E

s_

•r—03 -3

CJ

>5 aOJ

O 3 (/) 3 cn

a> CJ CD •r— s_

CJ CJ </> a.

a 3 r— cn o >

aj CD ra j3 03 4-5 * T“" s_ 3 3 cj 3

a; o s_ 1 -3 3 on

4- 4-» (-0 03 4-> co 3 OJ c_ CD -a •f— 4-5 o O CD aj (/> •r— 2 03 CJ 2: Q_ CD 03 o

cc cn 4-5 1 I 1 >5 05 U 1 s_ 3 ra 4-5 s: _i CJ 4-5 •r— 4-5 *T— on O' on cn 4—5 3 cn CJ CJ on 02 3 CD o •r— 2: 33 < O -a CD CJ o» 3 C

•r* r— • • ra 33 C5 -a 4-5 rO ra 40

cn •r-“ •r- r— •r— 3 3

LU >—

cn

V5

i—

•r—CJ 4—4-O£

i—

VIS_

a>> 1 .18
CO

on

oCOon

00

I—

<

oLUQ

UC

cnCl—

(TS

' OJ TO on

OJ

<S> U—

o

O. 4-

o o

s_Q. i/i

' 4»

CL)

<n

CM

PO

CM

s_

03

: on on

* z: uj

IgS

. d o

3 c. on |-i I— Kz lu "o s:

. >—• UJ

3

1— d

I

< 03 o on

=3 «=C O UJ

_ LU 21

ucon<C

h—CO

zoon

1

-u:on 3

03 03 h- r—

Q. C

r- 4-O

-o

03 r—

-M <13 03 >

4. O

<U 4- 3 cl

03 CL

CD 03

on r—

(O 03c

c o

03 •>—

i— cn Q- -t->

4-> O 3 4-

03 CL £

o. on o co r— 2:

O)> T3

0) c

-a ra

CL) c +-> 4- on 03 4- 5- O)>

-a '•<— 3 c

03 03 2 c

a> -r-

•1— ra > 4-> a; jo d a

P

*

ona.o

JO

on

4-o

ons_

rO3

r—E

OJ on

>7

s4->

onQ.

O

!/) JJ

$_o

o

4.

3

Q.3

<D on -M 3

ra o a•r- +J

I— (/> O 03

on 3

c cr o

oj -a

<u o s- +J <D2

on on Q. 3

O 03

s_O

-o

a>s-

•r—3

c

r

a)

s_

on

ajoj

4-3 • o 3

on ra

OJ r—

4- CL

-33 03

on on </> -3 3 ra 3 rt3 3 CO 4- cn 3 O c= CD

TO 2: 03 +-> -r- —' 3

3 3 u >, 3 +-> •T— h— -a O 3 03 03 (/) 4-> \ 3 e 21 ra +> a 03 03

j-J a3 03 \ 3 3 OJ CL 3 on on 03 O T3 4. 03 >, 4- > OJ 03 3 OJ £ -M >> ra r— O -r- 3 •<— 3 O E 03 on +-> S_ c/) +j •r— m ra J3 03 4.

03 4. <S) E 03 4_ 4J 4- ra > 03 3 03 4- CD a. o > TO on O 4- 4-

03 <— 3 TO 4- O o 3 k—

4- 3 CL JO

4. 3 \ O 03 +-> IS) O J-> 03 3 4-> ^

4- >i 3 CL </> JC 03 3 on JO O) 3 03 -t-> E 03 TO

03 E 1 03 CL s= zz

4. +J 3 2 TO 03 O -M 3

ra 4- O 3 3 r— •r— CL O 03 r— 03 •r- 03 £

a) > .— -M 4- > E TO

4- 4- O o +-> 03 03 O 3 d 03 03 Li_ ra \

d -a OU ra

CM m 03- LO OO

on r—

ra

4,

aj +j

03E

on

aj

OJ

03 4-

*> on

s- au

O) -r- 2 +> O 4. CL 03 3 CL

3

o

ra

OJ3

TOLU3

O

0303

O

C_>

_Q

03

1 .19
d<G.

LUd

Q_

iZ

00<

CM

CO

cn

CO

CM

CO

oi

CO

CM

s_03

a) 5-

rtS u

to

to

S_

qj qj

i-

(13 3

O' o<o

zcoto < <c o d d 2: (— O LU o —

Ltd

u

O c_ 00

2: <C 2: U Z UJ

s: o 2: c_ >—I UJ O I— d

_J <C

O UJ C_> 00

o> o <C uj a uj O UJ 31

3Z

00<c

HCOo00

to

a)c

Z3 QJ

i_o

Q.a. o

s_

aja)

s_

03 cj-a '— £ 1—

ra •—i a -a

aj £

qj 03 o to _z

QJ to C <13 a) hc=

QJ E

QJ

O

(13 S-

-t-> 4-

O0 -—

•ac

(T3

to jz

CO

(13 O

i- 4-

QJCD

(13 QZ

CJ

(13 Cl

03

S_03O

S_ Q_

03£o

03U3a

aj£

a; Q*

CM

+->£

ajEo

s-£

aj QJ£

QJ -a3

-a

a; QJ0

ajQJ

to

QJ

CJ

$_3

O.

to£

QJ a3

qj

s_o

a.

Q.3

>1

S_ QJ

tO3

-a£

O0

—1 . ru

GOd

i.

CO

CM

CO

o\CO

u

to

S-o

QJ03

S4—O

QJ

CJ

S_3O

OO

to

QJ

T3£

03

to *0

s_ra -a£

03 QJ

toE

QJ -a

03

cj

032

03c.o0

QJ

QJQ.O

CJto

QJs_3

4-

-a£

03

-L>£

QJ

to

0J

i.

Cl.

03

toO

CLO

s_CL

ajto

s_3o

cj

'qjs-03CL

aju

Cl

CO

-a£

03 > £O JZ

•r* SI QJ 03 03 1—

i_

03 4- CL O

QJ

i_ CL

CL 3 >

to 1 —* £ aj QJ O £ u JZ

•r— 03 U1 qj r— QJ 03 03 QJ (/) 1—

CJ 3O 4- s_ 4- O 0

•r" QJ 4-

Si 1—

03 s_ 03 CL 3 3 > 3

cr

O

O 1 U S_ QJ

i_ CL S- 0 CL 03 qj £ r0 QJ

CJO 3) (SI 3 •r- £ -a

S_ QJ •(— £ E 4-

4-> CJ 1— 03 03O

(-0 aj 3 s_ £ r— -a 3 0 £

•r— a> aj aj 0 O

to -£ •r- S- •r- -£ CJ > Q_ QJ

to JZ to QJ 03

•r— 0 <_ r— £

r— 0) 03 *r— J3 jO to r— *r— -a

H3 QJ S- 03 QJ s_ QJ X 3 £ -r- 0

(S! QJ

O •(—

C 0

UJ t— <J LL. >—1

CJ , # •or tn to 1

1 .20
RELATED ACTIVITIES

March 3-5

March 17-31

April 23

April 28-30

May 19-23

June 16-20

June 23-27

Sept. 7-12

Sept.

Sept. 22-25

Sept. 30-0ct. 1

Oct. 20-24

January 12-14

January 19-24

Northwestern Weights and Measures Association

meeting in Minneapolis.

Tholen visits to European countries to learn their

training and education practices.

National Conference of Standards Laboratories Education

and Training Committee Meeting - Las Vegas.

Northeastern Weights and Measures Association meeting - Springfield, Illinois.

National Scale Men's Association meeting in San Francisco.

International Organization for Legal Metrology meeting

in Washington, D.C.

National Conference on Weights and Measures meeting in

Washington, D.C.

Western Weights and Measures Association meeting in

Alaska.

National Association of State Departments of Agriculture.

NCSL meeting - NBS.

Seminar/Workshop, University of Texas, Dallas.

Southern Weights and Measures Association meeting in

-1981-

Semi nar/Workshop , Texas A&M, College Station.

NCWM Interim Meetings - NBS.
PUBLICITY

For Dimensions Magazine

September 30 - October 1, 1980

Seminar/Workshop on Education Programs in Measurement Science, University

of Texas at Dallas; sponsored by NBS and UT/D; contact Albert Tholen,

B363 Physics Building, 301/921-3301.

January 12-14, 1981

Seminar/Workshop on Technical Training Programs in Measurement Practice,

Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas; sponsored by NBS and A&M;

contact Albert Tholen, B363 Physics Building, 301/921-3301

Announcing Seminars /Workshops

1. Higher Education Programs in Measurement Science

Mail first flyer - March 14, 1980

Mail tentative program - July 25, 1980

Mail program - August 30, 1980

Hold Seminar/Workshop - September 30/0ctober 1, 1980

2. Technical Training Programs in Measurement Practice

Mail first flyer - August 1, 1980

Mail tentative program - September 26, 1980

Mail program - November 28, 1980

Hold Seminar/Workshop - January 12-14, 1981

Draft Flyers

1.22
30U3WW00 dO lN3V\llUVd3Q *S*n

sanvaNvis do nvayna ivnoiivn

3H1 ONV

svnva IV SVX31 do A±ISU3AINfl 3H1

AS a3HOSNOdS UVNIW3S V

u30N3i0S lN3W3HnSV3W Nl Nouvonas,,

ONIONDONNV

Place

Stamp

Here

CENTER FOR CONTINUING EDUCATION

THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS

P.O. BOX 688

RICHARDSON, TEXAS 75080

: .23
rn>

com

73m

H

C

3

Z

>

HH

>

H O

? 1

co

- m

n

2

°

Q* >

CO 3

O

0) 3

-<

c_C

Z

m

0

^ o^

° s

“ o

CD 2

<

m

m

H

>

COz

c_c

r*

-<

coo

o

o

CL C

co

CD

CO

3

^

c CD3

CO O

Z2* —+* R o 5

CD O

CD Cl Q. 05

2. O

2 cn il

o

c

o

E o' c

3 «

3*O

•O

X

m

r*3

2. o

c

CO

CO

CD

3 O’

CD CD

CDQ. oo

2

m

m

H

-<O

c

3

Z

m

m

a

CO

I I I aCD5 305 ® O

II

IT co

CO* Q.

CDQ. <Q = 3

2 ®

o'

13 3 05 05° n C 2:

>-I J05

CD <

CD

CDII(D R. a. ® - £ cr 3 CD CO —

05

CD *

ffl 2. o a T3 CD 3 <Q

CD ^ R CD

O' § C

-1 =. 05 c ~

3 E

_ CO 1%03 3

<£ CD

CD

O-K ^

o

03 CO

—i053

CO

CD 3

» 3

CD

O

3

O

CO

05COc

c

CO

CD

0

3

0

3

CO —

3

00

a.

CO

3- ”

0

05 3

O

0

0

0

.0c

CO0

cr0

3

CO

05

9

H

X

m

c

z

<

m3

COH

-<O

m

x

>

CO>

H

O

>

r->

<o

033

CL

3-0

z

>

H

o

z

>

$ - 3

c

3

m

>

c

o

*ncoH

>

Z

o

>

3

O

CO

3

o

£

0

a.

CQ0

0

o

3

O

c

3

0

3

co

c

3n

o

3

(0

3

00

COc0

3

0

3

COo

0

3o

0

o

o 5.3 - 0^

3 £

0

<£. 3 R o

-< 0

S’

co ^<£ ~ — CO O

3 - • or

CO -0 3

C

w SL

COo

0

3

a

3

0

0

O

o

0

co

CO

3

00

COc

0

CQ

a

m

_ <

9- rn 3 O

S3a. 2

co rn o Z

3 H

CO

g* 5' o —

o S’

CQ CD ^ O* _ 0 T3 co

3

Q.

C0

0

a ~

2 co U. n o ct>' 3 i. 0

= O O ' 0 0

-k 3

o a

3

0

Olo

0

0

o3*3

O

o

CQ

0

CO

cr0

3"0

<0

0

a.

0

0

CO0

CL3-0

3 2

O CQ

0 S'

03 0

co0 -a a

o CO Q_ 2. c

0 o

2

•a

73O

<

m

o

m

z

H

CO

0 TL" 3

a

c

co0

o

C

COO

3

0

0

COO

c

3

0

COc

o0

CO

0

3

0

3

CO0

0

COoTo

w_0

0

o

3

3

o

o o

o o

3 3

CO Q.

c C

3 2

-< o

3

a

c

CO

2

m

>

coc

73m

0

5 o

o o

0 3

a 3

x -ao

CD0

COCO

m

Z

H

CO

o ®

3 O

0

0

3

a

o

O’ <

CO

0

a

0

jO

c

0

o

0

o

o

3

n

c0

3

0

CO0

0

0

CO

CO0

3

0

o

"a0

0

o

3

CO

m

a

c

o

>

03cr O

2 Z

3- m

3 > ^ co o C

0 =

o m

T5 S

3 5

2. co

s: o

m

z

o

m

H

X

m I

C

Z

<

m

> 73 3 (O

3 H O

c

-< 3

O

0

o

~n 0 H

m CO X m > 2 CO Z >

> H

ZD a

O >

r- cr r* 0 >

3" co 0 to Q. 3

CO0 a

O

0

3

cr z

>. 0 —"I 05o z

5° >

o cl o cf o 73 O’ m 0

<5

CDo

I

«

«

P

UTD/NBS SEMINAR: EDUCATION IN MEASUREMENT SCIENCE; SEPTEMBER 30/OCTOBER 1, 198J

Name.

Address.

City

State

( )

I am interested in attending the Seminar. Plel

send me preliminary program information Jl

1980, along with registration and accommodate

particulars. (This is not a commitment to atteif

-Zip

( )

I do not plan to attend, but please put me on yc

future mailing list. Employer

Position_

( )

I have questions and desire to be contacted

program coordinator.

(or phone 21 4/ 690-2204 for information)

Phone: Area Code. .No. PLEASE RETURN THIS CARD SY JUNE I, 191

1 .24
LU »—

CD O GO o_ 2 i-h ct> O t—

i

H* r-*

zsz 3 CJ

00 t—

i

<c « < on O' Daz OS s: CL r— o t— •a: 1 3 c os c H* CM —

o CD •1* 3 ac < O LU <C CJ OS 2l >>

zz Cl LU $-

>—> 3 az CO s: 0= ZD 3

LU CJ on C

on LU <C 03 H— LU r"0 s

</> >> ITS +-» X

r— <D

</> |—

iHJ •» > cO CD

D"

+-> 00

r- fl rs wS -wrs

S» oS on

<U <C

i.

as 4Jc

CU cj

>> C

>

•I— to C rt3 ZD X

O)

CT1 0)o

cj

l

f Place

Stamp

Here

THE UNIVERSITY CENTER

TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE STATION, TX 77843

1 .25
(/> i

rt O 03 t—t CO cr cr qj 3 o Ql O QJ 3* O C ft (D ^ c 3 03 O 3

qj c

r

ro 3 3 3 CO a. 3 a CL — o -h rD —i. < rt —

1

ft- 3 —H

ft) -5 Z 03 QJ CO -*• ZJ

- 3* 3 —i CO n 3

* 3 Q» QJ 3 C O 03 03 03 O rt O) O 03

03 rt ft" TO CO 03 CO n 03 co 3

3 O 3 O C - —1 CO co qi n rt -a

- 3 o n -+)T3 03 ro • —< zr -h os 3

CO —<• 3 03 -a qj x 3 3 O 3 a

ro QJ CO O 3 Ql —j. ca o 3 rt ca

co —< O rt 3 Q- CO 3 o —

<

3

co « 3 Ol ft QJ < O 33 O Q>

co O 3 03 m 3 03 ca 3 -ti 3

O 0) o s a a 3 3 \ CO 3 *< 8J O 3 3 03 qj ft ca s: ~a 3 O rt -h _u a. -h -*• 3 O’ CD — O o 3 “J* ft* 03 O T3

Qj 03 CO a.<< 3 3 3 cz. 03 3 O O 73

rt rt 3 3" CO 03 03 X* CO 3 rt 3" C O -j. 3- CD rt •» ft co cd co o rt -n -*• 3 CO CD O 0) 3 CO 3- rt 3 3* 30 co 03 O —*• 03 53

3 O rt 0) CD O CO - a. 3 n co 3>

• Z no qj 3- CL 3 -a cc 03 03 Ql Z2

QJ 3 ro z ca —

i

-*• 3 3 —< o

rt O CL Q) •Urn —dm -a 3 QJ Co 3

_j. 2rt3 mw CL —rt o 2 » -‘•ax C - O 3 rt 3 C/3 03 ft- O C <t CO co -h QJ 3*

QJ rt QJ -•3 CO 03 T3 rt- C/3 ->• 03

QJ CO O QJ rt 3 O 3 rf 3 3

3 C 3 —j 3 co a c< Ql (D -i. 3

CL 3 QJ CO rt Qi 3 03

QJ 03 —J • o o Qj CD co ca co 3 CO 3 3 3 - C Q. a.- 03 Cl 3

CO CL 03 •h

I o

3

ca

ra3

fO3

Ql

Cim

oro

- TECHNICAL TRAINING IN MEASUREMENT PRACTICE -

I am interested in attending the Seminar/Workshop.

I am unable to attend but please put me on your mailing list.

Name

Address

C i ty

State Zip

(Fee or accommodation i are not yet available,

be included in a later

nformaticn

Both will

mailing.)

Employer

Posi tion

1 .26
PROGRAMS

'

'

-

'

.

'

.
MEASUREMENT SCIENCE EDUCATION

September 30-October 1, 1980

UT-Dallas Conference Center

The University of Texas at Dallas

Center for Continuing Education

National Bureau of Standards

1 .28
MEASUREMENT SCIENCE EDUCATION

MEASUREMENT SCIENCE brings together many technical disciplines

and specialized personnel to develop new technology for application

to modern operations.

MEASUREMENT of physical

quantities is essential to:

• Control of operations

• Conduct of commercial trade

• Consumer protection

• Management decisions

MEASUREMENT TECHNOL-.

OGY has changed in the last generation from simple mechanical and electrical devices

to sophisticated computerized

systems.

EDUCATION is urgently needed on a continuing basis.

NO DEGREE-GRANTING PROGRAM currently exists in the

field of measurement science.

The University of Texas at Dallas, in cooperation with the

National Bureau of Standards,

is conducting a seminar/workshop designed to assess the

educational needs in the area

of measurement science.

PROGRAM

September 30, 1980

9:00 REGISTRATION—UTD CONFERENCE CENTER

9:15 Introduction

Janet Harris

Director, Continuing Education

The University of Texas at Dallas

9:30 Keynote Address:

A UNIVERSITY LOOKS AT MEASUREMENT SCIENCE

Bryce Jordan

President

The University of Texas at Dallas

10:00 Moderator: Alexander L. Clark

Vice President, Academic Affairs The University of Texas at Dallas

RESEARCHING AND DEVELOPING

NEW MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY

Cary Gravatt Deputy Director, National Measurement Laboratory

National Bureau of Standards

10:30 COFFEE

11:00 DEVELOPMENT OF STANDARD METHODS

FOR MEASUREMENT SCIENCE

Bryant Mather

Chief, Concrete Laboratory

U.S. Army Engineers

Waterways Experiment Station

1 .29
11:30 APPLYING NEW MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY

S. H. Raskin

President

S. H. Raskin Corporation

12:00 LUNCH - UTD Conference Center

Address: FAR OUT MEASUREMENTS

John H. Hoffman

Head, Physics Programs

The University of Texas at Dallas

1:30 MEASUREMENT SCIENCE—ANTICIPA TED NEEDS

AND CAREER OPPORTUNITIES

Moderator: Charles Vincent

Director

Department of Consumer Affairs

City of Dallas

Panel: ELECTRONIC HARDWARE

Graydon Carrabee

Manager, Materials Science Branch

Texas Instruments

STEELMAKING

Donald Leckie

Assistant Director for Research

Republic Steel Research Center

2:30 COFFEE

2:45 AEROSPACE

Winton Howelt

Supervisor of Metrology

Bell Helicopter Textron

MEDICAL/BIOLOGICAL RESEARCH

Robert Putnam

Professor of Pathology

Department of Pathology

The University of Texas Health Science Center-Dallas

3:45 INTRODUCTION TO PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPING GUIDELINES

Alexander L. Clark

Vice President

Academic Affairs

The University of Texas at Dallas

4:00 THE WORKSHOP PROGRAM

Introduction to Group Leaders

Formation of Groups

Distribution of Materials

John Van Ness

Dean of School of Natural Sciences and Mathematics (Acting)

The University of Texas at Dallas

4:30 ADJOURNMENT

7:00 RECEPTION AND DINNER—UTD Conference Center

1.30
October 1, 1980

Workshop Moderator: John Van Ness

Pre-assigned groups meet in designated rooms

9:00

10:15

10:30

11:45

1:00

2:15

2:45

4:00

4:15

Session 1: PROBLEMS IN MEASUREMENT

COFFEE

Session 2: EDUCATIONAL NEEDS,

SKILLS/CAREER OPPORTUNITIES

LUNCH - UTD Conference Center

Session 3: CURRICULUM NEEDS

COFFEE

Session 4: PLENARY SESSION

Moderator: John Van Ness^

Reports from Group Leaders

GUIDELINES TO FOLLOW-UP PHASE

S. H. Raskin

ADJOURNMENT

REGISTRATION INFORMATION

Registration Fee: $75 (includes coffee, lunches, reception, and dinner)

To register, fill out the form on the back of this page and mail with fee or

billing instructions to the Center for Continuing Education. No ac- knowledgment of fees received will be made. Receipts, if required, may

be requested on the day the seminar meets. For additional information,

call the UT-Dallas Center for Continuing Education at 214/690-2204.

Location: UTD Conference Center

The University of Texas at Dallas is located at the intersection of Floyd

and Campbell Roads in Richardson. Campbell Road is Exit 26 off North

Central Expressway. The Center is on the western edge of the campus.

Participants in Conference Center programs may park free of charge in spaces designated for visitors in the lot west of the Center. The most

direct access to the Center is from Campbell Road on Waterview Drive.

Hotel Accommodations:

Seminar participants should reserve rooms directly with hotels of their

choice. For convenience, a block of rooms will be held at the following

hotels near the UTD campus: Holiday Inn (214/239-7211), Best Western

Inn (214/234-2431), and La Quinta Inn - Richardson (214/234-1016).

When making reservations at one of these hotels, piease specify atten- dance at the seminar on Measurement Science Education.

UT-Dailas is an equal opportunity/affirmative action university
MEASUREMENT SCIENCE EDUCATION

Name

Title

Firm Name

Business Address

City State Zip

Home Address

City State Zip

Home Phone Business Phone

Please check all of the items that apply to your work:

A. YOUR FUNCTIONAL ROLE. WITHIN YOUR ORGANIZATION

Management Manufacturing

Marketing Finance

Research 4 Development Administration

Engineering Other

B. TYPE OF ORGANIZATION (please describe)

Business:

Industry:

Government:

Education:

Other:

C. AREA OF MEASUREMENT INTEREST

Development of New Measurement Technology

Application of New Measurement Technology

Operation of Measurement Devices and Systems

Service/Maintenance of Measurement Hardware

Regulation of Measurement Functions

Other:

Make checks payable to The University of Texas at Dallas and return with registration form

to the Center for Continuing Education, Box 688, Richardson, TX 75080.

(For Office Use)

Registration Fee *

Date

Received Irf

1.32
SEMINAR/WORKSHOP

Technical Traininq Proarams in Measurement Practice

January 12 - 14, 1981

Place: University Center

Texas A&M University

College Station, Texas 77843

Sponsor: Texas A&M University and

National Bureau of Standards

Fee: $40.00

SCHEDULE

Monday (January 12)

9:00 a.m. Wei come / Introduction to Seminar/Workshop

9:15 a.m. Keynote Speaker

9:45 a.m. Invited Speakers

12:00 noon Lunch

1 :30 p.m. Invited Speakers

6:00 p.m. Reception - Cash Bar

7:00 p.m. Dinner in Center

Tuesday (January 13)

Workshops

Wednesday (January 14)

9:00 a.m. Workshops (summary sessions)

12:00 noon Luncheon Buffet

1:30 p.m. Plenary Session

3:00 p.m. End of Seminar/Workshop

1 .33
PUBLICITY

See "Related Activities"

Mailings :

August 1 - "Alert" mailing including letter from Chief OWM plus

two flyers (one for a general perspective andoone for A&M Seminar)

September 26 - Tentative program and logistics information

November 28 - Seminar/Workshop Program

Suggested Speakers :

Reagan Brown

Syd Andrews

Ambler

McCoubrey

Stabler

Workshop Leaders:

Federal - Jensen

Service Industry - Fuller

State - Delfino

FDA

Development of Agenda :

A.D. Tholen

S.H. Raskin

O.K. Warnlof

D. Tonini

R.N. • Smith

T.M. Stabler

L.H. DeGrange

F. A. Gerk

1 .34
TECHNICAL TRAINING PROGRAM IN MEASUREMENT PRACTICE

[To be developed as result of Seminar/Workshop]

1 .35
Possible candidates for subjects for training sessions include (for weights

and measures inspectors):

Weighing and Measuring Technology

Measuring Instruments

Weights and Measures Law

Practical Statistics and Sampling

Principles of Construction, Operation, and

Testing of Weighing and Measuring Equipment

Enforcement and Advices

Packaging and Labeling

(for metro! ogists)

:

History and Theory of Measurement

Basic Metrology

Standards Lab Practice

Precision and Accuracy

Digital Theory and Practice

Automatic Control

Selected Electrical, Physical, and

Chemical Courses

Instrumentation

1 .36
HIGHER EDUCATION PROGRAM IN MEASUREMENT SCIENCE

[To be developed as result of Seminar/Workshop]

1.37
PROGRAMS INITIATED BY OTHERS

The Office of Weights and Measures is attempting to integrate into its overall

plan the development of continuing education courses, seminars, and related

training developed by other groups.

The Great Lakes Division of the National Scale Men's Association has established

the Institute for Weights and Measures to work with the Continuing Education

Department of Ohio State University in establishing and conducting short courses

and seminars. Mr. A. Tholen is on the Executive Committee of the Board of

Di rectors.

Several other schools have visited or contacted Mr. Tholen expressing their

interest in developing programs in metrology. Most notably have been Harrisburg

Community College (Harrisburg, Pennsylvania) and Butler Community College

(Butler, Pennsylvania).

Possible curricula for Continuing Education will permit a student to enhance

knowledge on a selective bases and might include:

Graphical Communication

Logic and Method in Analysis

Mathematics and Statistics in Science

Fundamentals of Measurement Science

Introduction Physics

Introductory Analytical Mechanics

General Chemistry

Introductory Transducers and Instrumentation

Mathematics for Engineers and Physicists

General Physics

Possible curricula for the Masters Program :

General Metrology

Probability and Statistics of Metrology

Measurements Laboratory

Transducers and Instrumentation

Calcul us Selected Management, Business, and Technical Courses

1 .38
PART V

ENVIRONMENTAL

[To be developed based on results of NBS

"Measurement Needs Study" scheduled for

completion by the summer of 1981]

1 .39
PART VI

HEALTH AND SAFETY

[To be developed based on results of NBS

"Measurement Needs Study" scheduled for

completion by the summer of CY 1981]

1 .40
PART VII

INDUSTRIAL METROLOGY

[To be developed separately in cooperation

with private industry and the NCSL]

1 .41
PART VII

INDUSTRIAL METROLOGY

[To be developed separately in cooperation

with private industry and the NCSL]

1 .42
PART VIII

ENGINEERING METROLOGY

[To be developed separately in cooperation

with private industry and the NCSL]

1 .43

IIIII

APPENDIX 2

Subject: PMTE Project Background

During May and June 1977, the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) issued

two comprehensive reports on Federal Government precision measuring and test

equipment (PMTE) activities. The first report, titled: "A Centralized Manager

is Needed to Coordinate the Military Diagnostic and Calibration Program" (GAO

Report #LCD-427), complimented the Department of Defense for having an advanced

PMTE Program, with a sophisticated system for coordination among the many elements

of DOD, but was critical of DOD's slow progress toward consolidating its duplicative facilities and foot-dragging on its other efforts to standardize among the

military departments.

The second GAO report, titled: "Centralized Direction Needed for Calibration

Program", (GAO Report #LCD-426), was aimed at the civil agencies of the Government

and charged that those agencies have failed to conduct their PMTE activities in an efficient and economical manner. From these two reports, the GAO concluded

that improvements could be achieved and significant savings realized through

improved coordination of the Government's management and use of PMTE.

In a June 13, 1977, letter to the Director, U.S. Office of Management and

Budget (0MB), the GAO recommended that 0MB "(1) provide for central program direction and coordination of civil agencies' calibration systems, and (2) require

closer coordination with the Department of Defense for standardization and

consolidation of the total Federal calibration program".

On August 17, 1977, the Director, 0MB, asked the Secretary of Commerce to

have the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) take the following actions relative

to the Government's use of precision measurement and test equipment (PMTE):

• Assume the lead for coordinating improvements in the management

and use of such equipment.

• Assist agencies as necessary to identify areas for improvement.

• Recommend to 0MB such actions as are needed to improve the

management and use of such equipment.

Within NBS, the Office of Measurement Services (OMS) was given responsibil ity

for preparing and implementing an NBS action plan to respond to the 0MB directive.

The plan was completed by OMS on April 5, 1978, and approved by 0MB on May 24, 1978.

As a first step toward implementing the approved plan, OMS established the

"PMTE Project" consisting of a project manager, two technical coordinators , and

administrative aides. Staffing of the PMTE Project was completed on November 5, 1978.

2.1

II

APPENDIX 3

PRECISION

MEASURING AND TEST

EQUIPMENT

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

COMMERCE

National Bureau of Standards

December 1 979

Vol. 1, No. 3

PMTE Project

j Awards Study

On September 5, 1 979, the NBS

Precision Measuring and Test EquipI ment (PMTE) Project awarded a $117,523 contract to the Raytheon

Service Company, Burlington, MassI

achusetts, to study the following two

issues:

1.

Feasibility and cost-effectiveness

I

of increasing the use of in-situ calibrations, calibration checks, measure- ment assurance programs or other

alternatives to out-of-service equipI

ment calibrations for measurement

quality assurance and control in the

Federal government.

1

2. Cost-effectiveness of optimizing

calibration recall intervals and

algorithms for PMTE.

I

In the first study Raytheon will identify

and evaluate successful alternatives

to out-of-service equipment calibraI

tions to determine the cost and/or

benefits of Federal-wide adoption.

Both cost savings and improvements

to measurement quality will be

I

quantified to the extent possible. This

study is scheduled for completion July

1 980.

I

The second study will examine situ- ations where adjustment of calibration

recall intervals for different types of PMTE has improved measurement

^quality, or reduced costs without

Jdegrading measurement quality, and

will also examine the advantages of

(

Federal-wide guidlines for setting and

adjusting PMTE calibration intervals. This study will be completed March

1380.

Jin the performance of these studies,

Raytheon will distribute questionnaires

and visit approximately 20 Federal

I

calibration facilities to gather technical

Continued Center Page

Steel transfer block used for acoustic

emission sensor calibration. Ultrasonic

Nondestructive

Evaluation

By Donald G. Eitzen

Acoustic emission and pulse/echo

ultrasonic techniques offer great

potential for detecting and evaluating

materials defects nondestructively.

However, these methods are sensitive

to measurement system characteristics and to the condition of the

reference artifacts used. An effort to improve the reliability and diminish the

uncertainty of these techniques is underway at the National Bureau of Standards. Part of this effort has

focused on the development of measurement services for transducers

and reference blocks. The measure- ment services now available from NBS

are described below:

1. Ultrasonic Transducer Power

Output Versus Frequency. By using a modulated radiation pressure technique, the absolute total power output

of ultrasonic transducers versus

frequency is measured over any part of a range from about 1 -20 MHz. The uncertainty is frequency dependent but is nominally about ± 5 percent.

2. Ultrasonic Transducer and System

Power Output by Calorimetry. By using

a twin, series flow ultrasonic calorimetric comparator, the time-averaged

total absolute power output of a trans- ducer or sytem is measured for any

voltage input waveform in the range of 1-15 MHz. The uncertainty is approximately ± 7 percent.

3. Ultrasonic Reference Block Calibration. Sets of ASTM E-1 27 type ultra- sonic reference blocks are compared

with an interim aluminum reference

block and associated model by using a well-characterized measurement

system. The service provides a mechanism for comparing sets of

aluminum blocks with the NBS data

base and with other reference blocks

through the NBS ultrasonic system.

This measurement service has

recently been expanded to include

steel reference blocks.

4. Loaner Services for Transducers

and Reference Blocks. By arrangement, carefully characterized ultra- sonic source transducers and aluminum reference blocks can be made

available for loan. These can provide

on-site calibration of blocks or power

and frequency measurement apparatus with the user's system.

An expansion of the NBS artifact

system for ultrasonic reference blocks

to titanium is also being developed.

Also under consideration are materialindependent reference blocks made of amorphous, low-attenuation material:

these could replace much of the

present multiplicity of reference

artifacts. A calibration capability has also beer

developed for acoustic emission (AE

3.1
Melvin L. "Dutch" Fruechtenicht, retired Chief of the Metrology Development and

Engineering Division, U.S. Army Metrology

and Calibration Center, Redstone Arsenal. Fruechtenicht

Retires

After more than 38 years of Government service, Melvin L. “Dutch"

Fruechtenicht has retired from the US

Army Metrology and Calibration

Center which he founded. Starting his Government career in the early 1 940's

with the Army Ordnance Corps in Washington, DC, it was not long before

he found himself in Army uniform at Frankford Arsenal, Philadelphia. At the

end of World War II it was only natural

that he would remain as a civilian at Frankford in the Army's Gage Laboratory.

During the next two decades, there were many changes in the calibration

requirements of the Army, changes

that were necessary to support

complex weapon and missile systems.

Consequently, in 1962, the US Army

Metrology and Calibration Center was

established at Frankford Arsenal to develop and provide calibration

standards for the field Army. The core

of the new Center was ihe Army Gage

Laboratory and the top civilian helmsman was its Technical Director, Dutch.

After five years, the Center was

relocated at Redstone Arsenal,

Alabama, where Dutch became Chief

of the Metrology Development and

Engineering Division. With only 13

civilians and 4 military people transferring from Frankford to Redstone, reestablishment of the facility was a challenge. Dutch has played down his own role in the rebuilding of the Center

at Redstone, but insiders know that because of his guidance the Center

has prospered.

Dutch’s guidance at the Center will be

missed, but fortunately there was a

well-qualified candidate to take his

place, Fred Seeley, the new Chief of the Metrology Development and

Engineering Division. Fred has worked

in the Army's metrology program at Redstone Arsenal since 1 967. Prior to

that, he worked for the Calibration

Laboratory at White Sands Missile

Range, New Mexico. In the early

1 970's, Fred was active in initiating the

Army's program for automated

calibration systems and calibration

support of ATE systems. He is perhaps

best known for his work in developing

and advancing technology for self- calibration of automated systems. He

also has extensive experience in the

field of precision infrared, electrooptical, and basic electrical measurements.

In his new position, Fred Seeley will manage the Army’s development and

engineering efforts in metrology and

calibration. The development, design,

and acquisition of calibration and

repair equipment and facilities for an expanded Army test equipment cali- bration and repair program makes the

job a great challenge.

Fred Seely, nevriy appointed Chief of the Metrology Development ana Engineering

Division. U.S. Army Metrology and

Calibration Center. Redstone Arsenal.

Publications

"Field-Instrument Calibration Moves

Ahead in Navy’s MECCA”, George

Sideris, Electronic Design, Vol. 27, No.

15, p. 36, July 19, 1979.

"PATEC-An Air Force Approach to ATE Calibration", Joseph Santo,

Proceedings of AUTOTESTCON 79,

p. 242, Sept. 1979:

"Metrology Course Register", prepared by the Education and Training

Committee of the National Conference

of Standards Laboratories, Sept. 1979.

Contact: Bryan Werner, Westmghouse

R&D Center, 1310 Beulah Road.

Pittsburgh, PA 1 5235.

"Automatic Test Equipment—A Challenge from the Designers", Thomas

Keller, Workshop and Symposium of the National Conference of Standards

Laboratories, Oct. 15-17, 1979.

"NBS Interagency Transducer Project

1 951 -1 979—An Overview", Paul S. Lederer, NBS Tech Note 1110, issued

August 1979.

“Didymium Glass Filters for Calibrating the Wavelength Scale of Spectrophotometers—SRM 2009. 2010. 2013.

and 201 4”, William H. Venable. Jr., ana Kenneth L. Eckerle, NBS Special

Publication 260-66, issued October

1979.

NBS publications are available from

Joanne Marshall.

Mailing List

If you want to regularly receive PMTE

UPDATE, let us put your name on our mailing list. Call or write Joanne

Marshall.

FfVi

Published Dy tne PMTE Project. Office c: \‘easu'eneni Services. National M easure~e"t

LaDoratory. National Bureau of Standards U S Deoartment of Commerce.

Editor: Kathryn Leedy

Production: Joanne Marshall

For additional information.

cail (301) 921-2805. or write ; —

*- Office of Measurement Services : >A~i_ National Bureau o; Standards \ . T /

Washington D C 2023d

3.2
SEE2ESL. *".SSE

GIDEP- One Way

to Save Those Hard

To Get Resources

Does your organization write calibration procedures, design systems,

and/or components, need failure

experience data, or have an interest in exchanging metrology information with

other organizations? If your answer to any of the above is yes, then you need

to know about the GovernmentIndustry Data Exchange Program

(GIDEP).

The GIDEP is a cooperative activity

between Government and Industry

participants seeking to reduce or

eliminate expenditures of time and

money by making maximum use of existing knowledge. The program

provides a means to exchange certain

types of technical data essential in the research, design, development,

production, calibration, and other

operational phases of the life cycle of systems and equipment.

The program is centrally managed and

funded by the Government. Its participating organizations include

most Federal, agencies, the Canadian

Department of Defence, and hundreds

of industrial organizations.

Participants in GIDEP have access to four major data banks:

• Metrology Data Bank

• Engineering Data Bank

• Reliability-Maintainability Data Bank

• Failure Experience Data Bank

The proper utilization of these data

banks can assist in the improvement of

Meeting Announcements

ATE Seminar/Exhibit, January 7-10, 1980, Pasadena, CA. Contact: Kate

Fitzgerald, 1050 Commonwealth Ave., Boston, MA 02215, (617) 232-5470.

Precision Thermometry Seminar, March 1 0-1 4, 1 980. and September 8-12,1 980,

NBS, Washington, DC 20234. Contact: Nancye E. McBryde or James F. Schooley, Temperature Measurements and Standards Division, (301 ) 921 -331

5

or 3316.

American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Conference/Display, March 24-

27, 1980, Philadelphia Marriott, Philadelphia, PA. Contact: Conference Department, ASNT, 3200 Riverside Drive, P. O. Box 5642, Columbus, OH 43221 , (614)

488-7921.

Micromeasurements on Integrated-Circuit Silicon Wafers, July 15-18, 1980,

NBS, Washington, DC 20234. Contact: Elaine C. Cohen or John M. Jerke,

Electron Devices Division, (301) 921-3786 or 3621.

Electrical Measurements at High Voltage Levels, April 1-3, 1980, NBS.

Washinaton, DC 20234. Contact: F. Ralph Kotter, Electrosystems Division. (301

)

921-3121

.

quality and reliability and reduce costs

in the development, manufacture, and

support of complex systepns and

equipment:

The Metrology Data Bank (MDB)

contains related metrology engineering data on test systems, calibration

systems, and measurement technology and test equipment calibration

procedures, and has been designated

as a data repository for the National

Bureau of Standards (NBS) metrology

related data.

GIDEP also provides three special

services: the ALERT system, in which

the participant is notified of problem

areas, the Urgent Data Request (UDR)

system, in which a GIDEP participant

may query all other GIDEP participants on specific problems and the

Metrology Information Services (MIS)

which provides rapid response to GIDEP participants on queries related

to test equipment and measurement

services. The MIS system also

includes an extensive research

capability which is available to participants on a fee basis.

GIDEP participants are not subject to any fees or assessments. However,

each participating organization must

provide an internal program operation

to include at least one Representative,

a microfilm reader- printer, and

adequate working area within its facility.

Participation requirements or additional information about GIDEP may be

obtained by contacting the Director.

GIDEP Operations Center, Corona,

California 91720, (714) 736-4677, or Autovon 933-4677.

PMTE (continued)

I Metrology of Modern Electronic Instrumentation, May 13-15, 1980, NBS,

Washinaton, DC 20234. Contact: Barry A. Bell. Electrosvstems Division, (301)

921-2727.

I Traceability for Ionizing Radiation Measurements, May 3-9, 1980, NBS.

Washington, DC 20234. Contact: H. T. Heaton, II, Building 245, C229, (301 ) 921 - 2551.

(

Time and Frequency User’s Seminar, Spring and Fall, 1980, NBS, Boulder. CO

80303. Contact: George Kamas, Time and Frequency Division (303) 499-1000

x3378.

t

Introduction to Vibration and Shock Survivability, Measurement, Analysis,

Calibration, and Testing, 5-day course given on various dates in various cities. Contact: Tustin Institute of Technology. 22 E. Los Olivos St., Santa Barbara, CA

g 93105,(805)682-7171.

and cost data related to the government's management and use of PMTE

Members of the PMTE Project staff will accompany Raytheon on many of

these visits and will monitor the

company's performance throughout

the contract. The results of these studies are

expected to point the way towards

significant improvements and cost

reductions in the management and use

of PMTE throughout the Federal

government.

Contact: Jack Vogt (301 921-2805

3.3
Standards

Information Service

The National Bureau of Standards

maintains the Standards Information

Service (SIS) to provide up-to-date

information on standards and stan- dardization activities. The core of this function is the maintenance of a reference collection of engineering

and related standards, which includes over 240,000 standards, specifications, test methods, codes, and

recommended practices issued by:

• U.S. technical societies, professional organizations, and trade

associations

• State purchasing offices

• U.S. Government agencies

• Foreign national and international

standardizing bodies

The staff of SIS is prepared to respond

to inquiries from government, industry

or private individuals on the existence, source, and availability of standards,

standardization activities and related

activities. They also prepare lists and

bibliographies of standards and

publish general and special indexes of standards. In many cases, they have

information on historical versions of standards as well as the current

standard.

In order to use the services of the SIS,

which are available at no cost, contact

them directly at the address below.

Requests should be as specific as

possible. Include all terms necessary

to locate the standards of interest (e.g., x-ray machines rather than medical

electronic equipment). Their response

will be a list of the appropriate

standards together with information on where copies of the standards can be

obtained.

Standards Information Service

Room B-162, Building 225

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, DC 20234

(301) 921-2587 Telex: 89-8493

Video Tape Facility

By E. P. Williams

The US Army Metrology and Calibration Center (USAMCC), Redstone

Arsenal, Alabama, has established its own Video Tape Program. A videotape

capability and library were established

for providing tapes to aid calibration

technicians and repairmenof test,

measuring and diagnostic equipment

in the proper operation, maintenance

and calibration of US Army calibration

standards. In addition to video tapes on

calibration standards, tapes are also

available on general subjects such as "Why Calibrate," "What's a db,” "Practical Transistors,” and "Digital 1C

Troubleshooting." If you have problems with the maintenance of a cali- bration standard, understanding the

latest state-of-the-art in techniques, or just need refresher training, the

USAMCC Video Tape Library may

have a tape to solve your problem.

These tapes are available for loan to government calibration and repair

facilities worldwide. Contact:

Commander

US Army Missile Command

ATTN: DRSMI-MFTT

Redstone Arsenal, AL 35809

(205) 876-2984 AV: 746-2984/7661

Transducer frequency response as

determined by the modulated radiation pressure, shown lor one of the NBS

transducers available for loan. Ultrasonic (continued)

transducers and will shortly be offered as a measurement service. This

activity is partially supported by a

larger EPRI/NBS Acoustic Emission

Program and by the Office of Naval

Research. The objective is to determine the sensitivity versus frequency

of AE transducers over the approximate range of 1 00 to 1 000 KHz. This is accomplished by obtaining time

histories from the transducer uncer

test and the NBS standard transducer

both mounted on a large (2200 kg)

steel transfer block. The input is a simulated source on the same surface

of the block as the transducers.

Contact: D G. Eitzen (301 ) 921 -3646

• Standards Information Service

• GIDEP

• Nondestructive Evaluation

• PMTE Study

• Video Tape Facility • Publications

• Meet mas

U.S. Department of Commerce

National 8ureau of Standards

Washington, D C. 20234

512

Official Business

Postage and Fees Paia

U.S. Department

of Commerce

COM 215
PRECISION

MEASURING AND TEST

EQUIPMENT

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

COMMERCE

National Bureau of Standards

June 1 980

Vol. 2, No. 1

&

ID Number

Description

Calibration Date

Certification Specifications Location

Inventory File

Notification Cards

for Routine Calibration

Update Cjrrent

Instrument Calibration and Data Collection

Calibration Data Recorded & Transmitted

Add Data to History File Reverse

Traceability Data

Reverse traceability system at the Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge facility.

PMTE Notes

By Jack Vogt

In our May 1 979 issue, I described the

PMTE Project and its principal

objectives. Since we have now

completed our first full year of

operation, I want to describe some of the things we have been doing overthe

past year, as well was our thoughts for the future. Most of our first year efforts have been

directed toward three of our major

objectives; improving communications

and exchange of information among

agencies, assisting other agencies in identifying areas for improvement, and

identifying particularly effective

practices for broader adoption.

Some of the things we have done are:

• Publication of this newsletter, the

PMTE UPDATE, and publication of the

first edition of SP 546, "Catalog of Federal Metrology and Calibration

Capabilities”. As an indication of the

acceptance of UPDATE, we are

pleased to say that more than 70% of the articles in our first four issues have

come from you, our readers. The trend

in circulation is upward—from an initial distribution of 600 for the first issue to more than 2100 for this issue. I think

these facts are a real tribute to all of you who have contributed, and to our

editor. Kathryn Leedy, for the fine job

she has aone in putting it all together.

• Provide assistance to the NASA

Headquarters staff in a comprehensive

survey of quality and reliability assur- ance programs at the Johnson Space

Center. Through assuming principal

responsibility for the metrology and

calibration part of the survey, we were

able to significantly improve our own

knowledge of NASA PMTE policies

and ooerations. including several particularly effective oractices. while at Conunued on cage 6

Reverse

Traceability

By Paul W. Pless

Reverse Traceability— what is it 9 Why

do we need it? It is the ability to determine which instruments were cali- brated with a given standard during a

specified time interval. When a stan- dard is recalibrated and found to be

out-of-tolerance, reverse traceability is a valuable tool for eliminating or minimizing costly product retest where

instrument calibration is suspect,

especially when two or more similar

standards are available for calibration

work.

Prerequisites for a reverse traceability

system are a computer-backed recall program and an individual identification number for each instrument and

standard. The computer-backed recall program must provide a history file and

a current inventory (working) file. Required data for the current inventory

file are identification number, description. calibration date, certification

specifications, and location of each

instrument and standard. We use a card form for Computer Services to generate a "notification of scheduled

calibration" for each instrument or standard. We print on this card the data

required for the current inventory file. These data, plus the new calibration

date, the identification number of the

standard(s) used for the calibration,

and the condition in which the

instrument was found at calibration, are required data for the history file. The card is used to transmit these data

to the computer daia base for updating

the current inventory file and adding

traceability data to the history file.

If a large error is found during the cali- bration of a stanaard. then tne validity

of measurements made with this standard, and with instruments calibrated

with this standard, are Questionable for the period since the previous calibration of the standard. In tne event this occurs, we use our reverse traceability

program to identify all instruments cali- brated with this standard curing this period. The printout will list all of tne

calibrations of each instrument during

Continued on page 4
Technician

Training

In the past several years, members of the National Conference of Standards

Laboratories (NCSL) have identified a growing need for training programs for calibration technicians. The Education

and Training Committee of NCSL has

addressed this problem in several

ways including publication of a register

of training courses and maintenance of a lending library of training courses on

video tape.

A new and enthusiastically received

project is the development of adjunct

training courses for presentation at the

same time and in the same place as

the NCSL regional meetings. The

courses are designed to be one day in length, so that as the NCSL member

attends the regular meeting, technicians from his organization attend

the training session.

The first adjunct training course was

held in NCSL Region II atthe Lockheed

Electronics Company in Plainfield, NJ,

under the direction of Stanley Hale of Bendix Corporation. The subject was

basic metrology which included

information on mass, length, temperature, voltage, resistance, and time and

frequency. It was presented to 21 attendees from a wide variety of government, industrial, and commercial laboratories at a cost of only

SI 0 per attendee. The entire course was prepared and presented by NCSL

members on a voluntary basis. The

response of the students was enthusiastic. indicating they would like similar courses on each of the parameters

introduced.

5ased on the success of Region II. several other NCSL Regions plan to hold adjunct courses in the coming

year For more information, contact

Bryan Werner, 401-5X40, Westinghouse Electric R&D Center, Beulah

Road, Pittsburgh, PA 1 5235 (41 2) 256-

3420.

Editors Notes

• it has been suggested that each copy

ot "PMTE UPDATE" have holes

ounched in the margin so that it can be

stored in a three-ring binder. Would this be nelpful io you 9 Let me Know your

ore ference

• Notices of meetings and announcements of new publications are difficult to locate. I need your help. Please send

me your information

• If you would like to receive your own

copy of "PMTE UPDATE” regularly,

contact Joanne Marshall to get on the

mailing list.

Publications

"Training Index,” GIDEP, Nov. 1979.

Available from GIDEP Operations

Center, Corona, CA 91 720.

"NVLAP Glossary of Terms for

Laboratory Accreditation, Product

Certification and Standardization,”

D.B. Thomas, NBSIR 79-1956, Jan. 1980.

"A Practical Test of the Air Density

Equation in Standards Laboratories at Differing Altitude." R.M. Schoonover,

et.al., Journal of Research of the NBS,

Vol. 85, No. 1, p. 27. Jan-Feb 1980.

"Industry/Joint Services Automatic

Test Project--Final Report," F. McGinnis, Project Chairman. Dec. 79. Copies available from Project Executive Secretary R.D. Wothen, Aerospace

Industries Assoc., 1 725 DeSales

Street, NW, Washington. DC 20036,

(202)347-2315.

"Didymium Glass Filters for Calibrating

the Wavelength Scale of Spectrophotometers—SRM 2009, 2010, 2013,

and 2014," W.H. Venable, Jr. and K.L. Eckerle, NBS Spec. Pub. 260-66, Oct. 1979.

"Nondestructive Tests Used to Insure the Integrity of Semiconductor

Devices, With Emphasis on Acoustic

Emission Techniques," G.G. Harman,

NBS Spec. Pub. 400-59. Sept. 1979.

"Accurate Lmewidth Measurements

on Integrated-Circuit Photomasks."

J.M. Jerke, NBS Spec. Pub. 400-43.

Feb. 1980.

"A Reference Method for the Deter- mination of Chloride m Serum.' R.A. Velapoldi, et.al., NBS Spec. Pub.

260-67, Nov. 1979.

"Large Scale Integration Digital

Testmg--Annotated Bibliography,

1969-1978," T.F. Leedy, NBS Tech

Note 1 1 02, Aug. 1 979.

“Classification of Industrial Ionizing

Radiation Gauging Devices," by ANSI

Subcommittee N43-3.2, NBS Handbook 129, Oct. 1 979.

"A 20 Bit + Sign, Relay Switched D/A

Converter,” T.M. Souders and D.R.

Flach, NBS Tech Note 1 1 05. Oct. 1 979.

"Measuring Aerosol Particles, ' D.

Bright and I. Chabay, et.al., Chemtech,

Nov. 1979. Contact: D. Bright, A208

Chemstry Bldg., NBS Washington. DC

20234.

"SPEED2. A Computer Program for Reduction of Data from Automatic

Data Acquisition Systems." R.D

Peacock and J.M. Smith, NBS Tech

Note 1 1 08. Sept. 1 979.

"Design of Reflection Apparatus for Laser Beam Profile Mesurements."

E.G. Johnson, Jr., NBS Tech Note

1015, July 1979.

Free Publications

The following publications are

available free to qualified readers.

"It's About Time," a newsletter written

for the time and frequency community

by Frequency and Time Systems. Inc.. 182 Conant Street. Danvers, MA

01923.

"Technology Transfer Fact Sheet, a publication which is part of the Navy's

efforts to encourage technology

transfer to a broad auoience. Contact:

Gary Wagner, Code E411, Naval

Surface Weapons Center. Danlcren.

VA 22448.

"Test Trends," a newsletter aoout

micro control published by the Micro

Control Company, 7956 Main Street,

NE. Minneapolis, MN 55432.

Published by the PMTE P r c:ect. Of'ice of Meas- urement Services. National Measurement

Laboratory, National Bureau of S;a"ba r cs U S Decartment of Commerce.

Editor Kathryn Leeay

Production: Joanne Marshal:

For aoaitional information. _.'D

“/*»v

call (301) 921-2805. or write /

LL \

Office of Measurement Sen. ses : A?, j National Bureau of Stanoaros \ T /

Washington D.C 2023-i ' ••

s

‘

3.6
wapvrmi

3

Fred Kern, Vice Chairman of the NASA

Metrology and Calibration Workshop.

Kern is head of the Optical and

Pressure Measurements Section at NASA’s Langley Research Center.

NASA Workshop

The National Aeronautics and Space

Administration held its third annual

Metrology and Calibration Workshop in Estes Park, Colorado. Representatives

from all the NASA Centers and NASA

Headquarters, NBS, U.S. Army and

several NASA support contractors

attended the conference. The workshop was established to provide for a

centralized agency-wide standardization and coordination of metrology and

calibration activities. The program

included assessment of current NASA

metrology and calibration activities; an

update by Jack Vogt on the NBS PMTE

Project; a review of the U.S. Army

Metrology and Calibration System for Calibration Interval Analysis and

Adjustment by Frank Westmoreland

and Jack Bradford; plans for improvements in agency-wide equipment

management; a review of the use of GIDEP services; current and planned

MAP activities at each center; use of agency-wide calibration and standards decals; status of each center’s calibration activities and use of automatic calibration equipment;

NASA's calibration capabilities

catalog; and development of the

group’s goals and objectives.

Future directions of the group include;

development of coordinated procedures for determining recalibration

intervals for the NASA Reference,

Transfer, and Working standards;

development of agency-wide system

for using video tape metrology,

calibration and maintenance training

films; development of a coordinated

program for development and use of ATE; and continued coordination of NASA activities with NBS’s PMTE

project. This group is presently

evaluating the requirements for

improvements in the techniques and

standards for calibrating radiometric

sensors, a problem area identified

during a recent Flight Technology

Improvement Workshop at the University of Maryland. Finally, the

workshop format was evaluated to improve the effectiveness of group

activities and future workshops.

Contact: Fred Kern, (804) 827-3234.

Welcome ISA

We would like to welcome our new

readers from the Instrument Society of America. We appreciate the efforts of Ted Plum at ISA Headquarters in handling the distribution. We stress to our ISA readers that PMTE UPDATE is intended to be a medium for information exchange between people

interested in calibration and metrology.

We urge you to participate in this exchange by submitting articles, or ideas for articles, about your own

PMTE experiences.

NCSL Conference

The National Conference of Standards

Laboratories (NCSL) has announced

that their 1980 Workshop and Symposium will be held September 22-25,

1 980, at the National Bureau of

Standards in Gaithersburg. Maryland.

Dennis Gallagher, Leeds & Northrup,

and Brian Belanger, NBS, will co-chair

the conference.

The theme of the 1 980 meeting will be

"Management’s Role in Measurement

Quality." Technical sessions will

address ATE, NBS Measurement

Assurance Services, instrumentation

inventory control, NDE, standard

reference materials, and Quality assurance.

Contact: Brian Belanger. NBS. Physics

8362, Washington. DC 20234. (301)

921-2805

Meeting Announcements

ATE Seminar/Exhibit, June 1 6-1 9, John B. Hynes Veterans Auditorium, Boston,

MA. Contact: Benwill Publishing Corp., (617) 232-5470.

National Conference on Weights and Measures, June 22-27, ShorehamAmericana, Washington, DC. Contact: H. Wollin, (301 ) 921 -3677.

Micromeasurements on Integrated-Circuit Silicon Wafers, July 15-18, NBS,

Gaithersburg, MD. Contact: E. Cohen, (301) 921-3786.

NCSL 1980 Workshop and Symposium, September 22-25, NBS, Gaithersburg,

MD. Contact: B. Belanger, (301) 921-2805.

Autotestcon ’80, November 3-5, Sheraton Washington Hotel. Washington, DC.

Contact: T. Dankworth, (703) 521-5956.

Cherry Hill 1 980 Test Conference, November 1 0-1 3, Cherry Hill. NJ. Contact: K. J

Anderson, (609) 424-2856.

Second International Symposium on Flow: Its Measurement and Control in I

Science and Industry, April 6-10, 1981, Marriott's Pavilion Hotel, St. Louis, MO.

Contact: G. Mattingly, (301 ) 921 -3681

.

Second Iniernationai Conference on Precision Measurement and Fundamental

1

Constants. June 8-12, 1981. NBS, Gaithersburg. MD. Contact: B. Tavlor, (301)

921-2701

‘ ' ' 
Measurement of AC waveforms, an activity which relies heavily on the calibration

software. (Naval Avionics Metrology Laboratory)

traceability printout as being last cali- brated using the questionable standard. Then, we retest only the product

which was originally tested with instru- ments found out-of-tolerance at this special recalibration.

Contact: Paul W. Pless, Oak Ridge Y12 Plant, Oak Ridge, TN 37830, (615)

574-2558. (This facility is operated for the Dept of Energy by Union Carbide

Corp. --Nuclear Div. Under Contract

W-7405 eng26).

Editor’s Note:

“Reverse traceability " as described by

Mr. Pless m this article should not be

confused with the term “traceability

which refers to the ability to show that measurements are accurate relative to NBS or some other reference base.

See for example "The Evolving

Concept of Traceability" by 8. C. Belanger, PMTE UPDATE. Vol. 2, No 2, September 1979.

Software

Management

Automated measurements offer an

exciting and productive future for the

metrology laboratory, but also provide

new and significant challenges.

Computer software, as an integral pan

of measurement systems, must have

development, quality assurance, and

utilization control. Software "certifica- tion” can be as important as hardware

"calibration” in assuring the quality of automated measurements.

The Metrology Division of the Naval

Avionics Center (NAC) has studied the

problem and has developed a system

for software management and control. The system is designed to maintain

quality control, schedule control, and

cost control. Even though the system at NAC is used for software control for auto- mated calibration on the HewlettPackard System 1000, it is anticipated

that many of the principles and

methods employed will have wider

aoplication and may be utilized

wherever automated measurements

are made.

A complete description of the system is available in an NAC report entitled System 1000 Calibration Software

Management and Control System.”

Contact Thomas A Pearson. Director.

Metrology Div. 430, Naval Avionics

Center, 6000 East 21st Street,

Indianapolis, Indiana 46218, (317)

353-3931.

Reverse Traceability (continued)

the period, even if the calibration was

performed using another similar stan- dard. This is valuable information when

coupled with the data showing the

condition in which the instrument was

found at the time of calibration. If the reverse traceability printout shows that a questionable instrument was

subsequently calibrated with another

similar standard, and the instrument was found to be in tolerance atthe time

of the later calibration, then we have

reasonable assurance that the error found in the questionable standard was not reflected in that instrument.

This knowledge restores our confid- ence in the measurements made by

that instrument and thus eliminates

costly product retesting. As a matter of interest, we find that subsequent re- caiibration with another similar stan- dard occurs frequently because the

calibration interval for the typical

instrument is shorter than that for the

standard.

Our next step is to recalibrate those

instruments iaentified by the reverse

Conference

The National Bureau of Stanoards will host the Second International Conference on Precision Measurement

and Fundamental Constants in Gaithersburg, Maryland, from June 3-

12,1981.

Conference organizers hope to provide an international forum for scientists engaged in experimental

and theoretical research on precision

measurements relating to the fundamental physical constants and to the

testing of related theory The last such

comprehensive international meeting was held at NBS in August of 1970.

One goal of the 1981 Conference will be to gather additional data for the

1981 adjustment of the values of the

fundamental constants recommenced

for international use. Proposals for papers for the conference are now

being solicited.

Contact: Dr. B. Taylor. Bldg. 220. Room

B258. NBS. Washington. DC 20234 . New Standard

A modulation factor standard nas nee"' developed to support the ^eeerai

Aviation Administration s requirements

for a measurement caoaciiity ; or the

ILS and VCR navigation systems ~~e Contm^ec on cage 5

3.8
aa—hbbisbs

Laboratory

Automation

The Automatic Test and Calibration

Systems Committee of the National

Conference of Standards Laboratories

(NCSL) has recently produced a directory of automatic calibration

system users and a listing of calculator

program tapes available for exchange.

The directory of calibration organizations who are utilizing some degree of automation in their calibration

processes is designed to:

1. provide a means whereby users of similar automatic calibration systems

could share common and unique

problems, solutions and experiences,

and to

2. serve as a useful source of contacts

for those organizations wishing to evaluate the benefits and trade-offs

prior to system/instrument acquisition.

The directory is divided into three

sections. Section (A) contains the

users of major commercial systems,

and Section (B) lists the users of in- house designed systems. Section (C)

was developed to identify semiautomatic systems, and any areas wherein sequential data collection or machine data reduction was being

utilized. The information for the

directory was obtained from several

surveys and questionnaires mailed to the NCSL membership during 1977

and 1978 by the Automatic Test and

Calibration Systems Committee.

The listing of the desk-top calculator

program tapes contains programs

which were developed by NCSL

member organizations and are used in conjuction with desk-top calculators or small controlling computers to perform

metrology related tasks such as data

reduction, table generation, and in some instances, actual calibration

tasks when used with peripheral

equipment and/or standards.

An exchange program has been

developed by the Automatic Test and

Calibration Systems Committee to provde for the exchange of tape

programs between interested NCSL

member organizations. The listing

identifies each tape with a control

mjmbBr. title, the calculator used ana a cnet description of what the orogram can oerrcrm. An, memoer organization

may participate as a REQUESTOR or SUBMITTOR by properly filing a

release form with the Committee and

following the written procedure for exchange. The information for the

listing was obtained voluntarily from a

direct mailing to all NCSL member

delegates in 1978. As new programs

are developed and offered by member

organizations, the Committee will release revisions to the listing to all NCSL organizations who have a signed Release Form on file with the

Committee.

Contact: R.B. “Pete” England, General

Dynamics Pomona, P.O. Box 2507,

MZ4-32, Pomona, CA 91766, (714)

629-5111, ext. 4312/3945.

NBS Services

Acoustic Measurements

Three new services are available for pressure and t'ree-field calibration of "half-inch” diameter condenser

microphones: pressure calibrations

performed in couplers by comparison

with NBS standard microphones: freefield calibration performed at normal

incidence in an anechoic chamber

using reciprocity methods; free-field

calibration of certain other microphone

types.

Acoustic Emission Sensors

The new calibration service will provide the frequency response of a transducer to surface waves in the

solid to which it is attached. The

response is absolute, the units being

volts output per unit of surface

displacement. The measurement is made possible by a technique for generating an accurate step function

force, an exact elastic solution for the

ensuing motion of the surface, and a precise capacitive motion sensor. A

two ton steel block with optically

polished faces is used as the elastic

medium.

Length & Diameter

Replacing the linewidth calibration

service, NBS will supply through its Standard Reference Materials pro- gram a series of artifacts intended for calibrating optical microscopes used

to measure linewidths in the 0.5- to

1 0//m regime. The first artifact in this series, which will be announced as 3.9

SRM 474, is specifically designed for the measurement of opaque lines and

clear spaces on integrated-circuit

photomasks in transmitted illumination. This SRM consists of lines and

spaces in an anti-reflective chromium

film on a glass substrate. It is designed

for use with all commonly used types of linewidth measurement systems,

including filar, image shearing, and

video micrometer.

Reduction of Little Used Services

Several services for which there is little or no demand have been discontinued.

• Photographic edge calibrations

(NBS furnished)

• Photographic edge calibrations

(customer furnished)

• Photographic sinusoid calibrations

• 4-terminal ac resistors up to 10kHz

• Current transformer, ratio and phase

angle— 1 range at 1 freq., 1 burden,

primary current 8,000 to 12,000 A

• Current transformer, ratio and phase

angle, at 1 secondary current on

additional combination of range, freq.,

and burden, primary current 8,000 to 12,000 A

• Watthour meters, special high

accuracy test--2 determinations of percentage registration

• Coaxial and waveguide pulse power

meters

• Irradiance of 253.7 nm line of Hg

from low pressure mercury lamp

Contact: Lee Kieffer, NBS, (301 ) 921 - 2805.

New Standard (continued)

standard consists of both a precision

modulation meter and a stable

amplitude-modulated signal source. Although designed primarily for ILS

and VCR signals, it has general

purpose capabilities within an rf range

of 1 0 MHz to 500 MHz and an af range

of 2.0 Hz to 20 kHz. Measurement

uncertainty is less than 0.11 percent

modulation below 90 percent modulation for ILS/VOR tones of 90 Hz anc

above, and is somewhat greater at 30

Hz. Details of this work are published in “A Stancard for RF Modulation Factor.' M.G. Arthur and G.R. Reeve. NBS

Technical Note 1016. Seotembe r 1979.

Contact: M G Arthur. (303. 499-

3603
PMTE (continued)

the same time offer suggestions for improvement.

• Provide assistance to the US Air Force Logistics Command Inspector

General's Office in its inspection of the

Aerospace Guidance and Metrology

Center (AGMC). Again, this effort was

mutually beneficial, as it afforded us an

opportunity to learn more about particularly effective Air Force PMTE

concepts, and resulted in management improvement suggestions for the

AGMC.

• Award of a contract to the Raytheon

Service Company to study the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of (1)

increasing use of alternatives to out- of-service equipment calibrations, and

(2) optimizing calibration recall

intervals and algorithms. This contract,

which was described in greater detail m the December 1 979 UPDATE, will be

completed this summer and is expected to point the way towards

improvements and cost reductions in Federal management and use of PMTE.

During the course of the past year, we

have identified, specific opportunities

for improvement in PMTE management and use. Some of these are: CALIBRATION PRODUCTIVITY-our

observations noted a low of 100

actions per person per year to a high of 1300 actions per person per year at

• Reverse Traceability

• Laboratory Automation

• NASA Workshop

• Software Management

• Tecnnician Training

• NCSL Conference

facilities having similar although not

identical mixes of workload.

AVERAGE CALIBRATION TIME-we

saw a range of 0.5 hour to more than 7 hours for the same mechanical item in one case and 0.5 hour to 15 hours in another case involving an electronics

item, with less pronounced variations

in many more cases. TERMS AND DEFINITIONS--the

PMTE terms we are all familiar with just

don’t mean the same thing to everyone. CALIBRATION PROCEDURES—

differences between procedures for the same item appear to be more

philosophical than technical in nature. CALIBRATION INTERVALS-ranging

from 90 days to 2 years for the same

model PMTE item.

TRACEABILITY FOR AUTOMATIC

TEST EQUIPMENT (ATE)—the current concepts for establishing measure- ment traceability are somewhat

questionable.

About the Future

While continuing our regular activities,

we will emphasize projects which are

specifically directed toward the opportunities we have identified. For

example, we have gathered considerable information on average

calibration times from several repre- sentative facilities, and are now trying

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Bureau of Standards

Washington. D C 20234

512

Official Business

to understand the reasons for large

variations in both calibration time and

productivity--m the hope that both

productivity and quality can be

improved.

We are reviewing multiple calibration

procedures to assess the technical

and economic differences and to determine the costs/ benefits of

standardization. We are preparing a publication of PMTE terms and

definitions. Our plans also include more involvement in ATE traceability, completion/

implementation of the cost-effectiveness studies contract, gradual

expansion of the Interagency PMTE

Group to include other agencies, and

preparation of special handbooks/

reports aimed at assisting managers

and users of PMTE. These plans, however, will be changed as necessary to conform to the priorities identified over

the next several months. This is where

your input and assistance can be most

valuable-let us have your candid

comments on both our ongoing

projects and the direction of our future

plans. We are vitally interested in your

opinions and suggestions as to new we

can best utilize our limited resources to coordinate and provide assistance in improving PMTE opera- lions at both

the national and local levels.

Send me your suggestions or call me at (301) 921 -2805."'

Postage and Fees P a'd U S Deoartmen:

of Commerce

COM 215

r

MrU.S. mail
i[i
HF
APPENDIX 4

COST-EFFECTIVENESS

STUDY TO DETERMINE ALTERNATIVES TO

OUT-OF-SERVICE CALIBRATION OF

PMTE WITHIN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

12 August 1980

NBS CONTRACT: NB79SBCA0061

Prepared for

The Precision Measuring and

Test Equipment (PMTE) Project

Office of Measurement Services

National Measurement Laboratory

U.S. National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

Prepared by

RAYTHEON SERVICE COMPANY

2 Wayside Road

Burlington, Massachusetts 01803

4.1
EXECUTIVE BRIEF

Background

Federal agencies use Precision Measuring and Test Equipment (PMTE) valued

in excess of $2.7 billion. Total Federal expenditures for calibrations of

instruments are estimated to be more than $200 million per year. A General

Accounting Office (GAO) report to the Office of Management and Budget (0MB)

has criticized some Government agencies for not having well-coordinated and

managed agency-wide programs for calibration of their PMTE. The 0MB believes

there are potential cost savings in more effective use of PMTE and has asked

the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) to coordinate a program within the

Federal Government to improve the management and use of PMTE.

In performing this coordination, NBS established the Precision Measuring

and Test Equipment (PMTE) Project and developed a PMTE Program Plan which was

approved by both 0MB and GAO. The direction, as outlined by the 0MB, is as

f ollows

:

• Assume the lead for coordinating improvement in the management

and use of such equipment.

• Assist agencies as necessary to identify areas for improvement.

• Recommend to 0MB such actions as are needed to improve the

management and use of such equipment.

As part of these tasks, the PMTE Project on September 5, 1979, awarded a contract to the Raytheon Service Company (RSC) to study two areas (1) alternatives to PMTE out-of-service calibration, and (2) optimization of calibration

recall intervals and algorithms. This report contains the findings and recommendations of Study Number 1, Alternatives to PMTE Out-of-Service Calibration.

4.2
Introduction

Precision measuring and test- equipment must be accurate and precise; that

is, calibrated to produce readings comparable to readings from devices traceable

to the U.S. National Legal Measurement Standards. There is a degradation withtime in the characteristics of PMTE so that, in order to establish confidence

that it has retained the ability to make accurate and repeatable measurements,

PMTE must be recalibrated periodically. In most cases today, PMTE throughout

the Federal Government is removed from service and transported to a calibration

laboratory or facility for recalibration. Depending upon the nature and

reliability of the PMTE, it may be removed from service for recalihration ac often as three or more times per year, and for several days each time. Since

many applications demand constant availability of PMTE, the result has often

been procurement of duplicative PMTE for use while similar items are out-ofservice for recalibration. In view of the generally high acquisition cost of

PMTE, and the additional cost of recalibrating duplicative items, this is not

generally regarded as an acceptable solution to the problem. Some agencies are

known to have developed and implemented a variety of alternatives to this

conventional out-of-service calibration concept. For example, one agency uses

mobile truck/van laboratories to take the calibration capability to installations

remote from the central laboratory. The same agency, and other agencies have

also permanently relocated calibration capabilities, as satellite units, to

remote locations with large workloads. A number of facilities have reportedly

implemented other types of measures allowing calibration to be done on-site,

or even in situ to greatly minimize out-of-service time. The identification

of such alternatives, determination of the extent and success of their use

today, and feasibility and desirability of their broader use throughout the

Federal Government is the subject of this report.

Methodology

The study was begun on September 5, 1979. The Raytheon Service Company, in

close coordination with the PMTE Project staff, selected 23 different calibration

activities for site visits by RSC personnel, with an additional fifty-two

4.3
activities selected for completion of a questionnaire. Both site and questionnaire locations were chosen to be representative of agencies, both military and

civilian, throughout the Federal Government and with a wide range of workload.

For comparison, some private industry facilities were included. Data gathered

represents information available between September 1979 and March 1980.

A major purpose of this study was to identify, explain, and define alternatives to out-of-service equipment calibrations; that is, methods of performing

calibration without removing the PMTE item being calibrated from service during

the calibration process.

Only one application of an absolute alternative to out-of-service calibration was observed at the twenty-three sites visited, and it was in use on

a limited basis and only in one parameter (mass). However, several other

partial or less absolute alternative methods of delivering calibration services

were observed, all of which significantly shorten the out-of-service period.

For the purpose of this study, all of these methods are referred to and treated

as "alternatives to out-of-service equipment calibration."

Alternatives Identified

The methods currently used as alternatives to out-of-service calibration

are:

_1_. Satellite Laboratories - Elements of a central laboratory relocated to

installations or heavy workload sites on an installation. Takes the

calibration capability nearer to the workload.

2 . Mobile Truck/Van Laboratories - Similar to satellite laboratories,

but mobile to allow one such laboratory to service PMTE at several

installations or sites with smaller workloads. Takes the calibration capability even nearer to the workload, but may cost more due

to travel and per diem expenses.
3_. Calibration Carts - Mobile carts equipped with selected calibration

standards and rolled to and from workload points within an installation

or building on an installation. May be used to calibrate PMTE in situ.

4_. Portable Standards - Selected calibration standards which may be hand

carried or otherwise easily transported to and from workload points

and offer the same benefits as calibration carts.

5_. Measurement Assurance Programs (MAP) - Use of externally certified

standards to verify local measurement systems (standards, techniques,

operators, environment, etc.). Often accomplished in situ.

_6. Operator Calibration - Accomplished by the owner/operator using a simple reference standard furnished by a central laboratory.

7. Wire Transmission - Dissemination of standard or reference signals

from a central laboratory to satellite laboratories, production

lines, etc.

Other Factors

Several other factors which affect the frequency or length of the outof-service period were also identified. Examples of such factors are turnaround time, pick-up and delivery services, loan crib/exchange pools, and

variations to calibration requirements, e.g., no periodic calibration required

(NPCR) , calibrate before use (CBU) , calibrate only upon repair, and limited

calibration. All of these factors were reviewed as a part of this study and

are discussed in this report.

4.5
Findings and Recommendations

(1) Finding

Only one true example of in situ calibration was identified. It is an

excellent example of a successful application of in situ and in-service calibration, and there is every reason to believe that other cases exist where

good results can be obtained.

Recommendation

Encourage increased use of in situ and in-service calibration. Perform

research and development to facilitate increased use.

(2) Finding

Out-of-service time for PMTE calibration in a central laboratory is

excessive (16-17 days). At some facilities, centralized pick-up and delivery

services have shortened out-of-service time to 7-8 days, on-site calibration

has shortened it to 3-4 days, and in situ calibration has shortened it to one

day or less.

Recommendations

Encourage increased use of on-site and in situ calibration at all

Government facilities.

Encourage use of centralized pick-up and delivery services.

4.6
(3)

Finding

PMTE is often underutilized. Central loan pools have improved utilization.

Recommendation

Central loan pools be established .

(4) Finding

Many facilities under or overcalibrate PMTE as a result of a suboptimum

calibration interval program and/or routine acceptance of manufacturer's specifications as tolerance limits, regardless of the actual use of the instrument.

Recommendations

Consider adoption of calibration interval programs recommended in NBS

Study, "Optimizing Calibration Recall Intervals and Algorithms".

Review actual instrument use to establish realistic tolerance limits.

Broaden tolerance limits and limit calibration. Calibration need only

be done to the extent necessary to meet user requirements.

(5) Finding

Some facilities periodically calibrate PMTE which does not require or

warrant periodic calibration.

I

I

i

4.7
Recommendations

Designate instruments which are not used to make quantitative measurements

as "No Periodic Calibration Required (NPCR)" and remove them from the recall

system.

Place seldom used instruments in a "Calibrate Before Use" only status.

(6) Finding

Calibration program management information is limited, lacks uniformity

and in some cases is non-existent. Facilities cannot exchange such data, and

facilities without such data cannot effectively assess or manage their calibration programs.

Recommendation

Develop a uniform calibration program management information system for

Federal Agency use.

(7) Finding

There is confusion created by the lack of common understanding of the

meaning of various metrology and calibration terms.

Recommendation

Develop and disseminate standard terminology.

4.8

pm
APPENDIX 5 .RAYTHEO

RAYTHEON

SERVICE COMPANY

COST-EFFECTIVENESS

STUDY TO DETERMINE METHODS FOR

OPTIMIZING CALIBRATION INTERVALS FOR

PMTE WITHIN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

12 August 1980

NBS CONTRACT: NB79SBCA0061

Prepared for

The Precision Measuring and

Test Equipment (PMTE) Project

Office of Measurement Services

National Measurement Laboratory

U.S. National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

RAYTHEON SERVICE COMPANY

2 Wayside Road

Burlington, Massachusetts 01803

Prepared by

5.1
EXECUTIVE BRIEF

Background

Federal agencies use Precision Measuring and Test Equipment (PMTE) valued

in excess of $2.7 billion. Total Federal expenditures for calibrations of

instruments are estimated to be more than $200 million per year. A General

Accounting Office (GAO) report to the Office of Management and Budget (0MB) has

criticized some Government agencies for not having well-coordinated and managed

agency-wide programs for calibration of their PMTE. The 0MB believes there are

potential cost savings in more effective use of PMTE and has asked the National

Bureau of Standards (NBS) to coordinate a program within the Federal Government

to improve the management and use of PMTE.

In performing this coordination, NBS established the Precision Measuring

and Test Equipment (PMTE) Project and developed a PMTE Program Plan which was

approved by both 0MB and GAO. The direction, as outlined by 0MB, is as follows:

• Assume the lead for coordinating improvement in the management

and use of such equipment.

• Assist agencies as necessary to identify areas for improvement.

• Recommend to 0MB such actions as are needed to improve the

management and use of such equipment.

As part of these tasks, the PMTE Project on September 5, 1979, awarded a contract to the Raytheon Service Company (RSC) to study the optimization of

calibration recall intervals and algorithms. This report contains the findings

and recommendations of RSC.

5.2
Introduction

Precision measuring and test equipment must be accurate and precise, that

is, it must be calibrated to produce repeatable readings comparable to readings

from other devices whose accuracy is traceable to the National Legal Measurement

Standards. There is a degradation with time in the characteristics of PMTE so

that, in order to establish confidence that it has retained the ability to make

accurate and repeatable measurements, PMTE* must be calibrated periodically. The

more often that recalibration occurs, the greater the assurance that an instrument is capable of accurate and repeatable measurements, and the greater the

cost of the calibration program. The determination of the optimum method for

establishing/adjusting the frequency of recalibration, i.e., calibration

interval, is the subject of this report.

Methodology

The study was begun on September 5, 1979. The Raytheon Service Company,

in close coordination with the PMTE Project staff, selected 23 different calibration activities for site visits by RSC personnel, with an additional

52 activities for completion of a questionnaire. Site visit locations and

mailed questionnaire recipients were chosen to be representative of agencies,

both military and civilian, throughout the Federal Government and with a wide

range in workload. For comparison, some private industry facilities were

included. Data gathered represent information available between September 1979

and March 1980.
Alternatives Identified

The. methods currently used for establishing calibration intervals are:

_1_. Adjustment by Instrument Serial Number—takes into account

individual characteristics of an instrument; decision is made

with the most recent although perhaps limited statistical

information.

2_. Adjustment by Manufacturer’s Model Number—based on statistical

analysis of all instruments of a given model number; does not

consider individual instrument performance.

3_. Adjustment by Instrument Class—broad assignment of intervals;

difficult to group different model instruments into classes.

A_. Adjustment for the Entire Instrument Population—simplifies

calibration scheduling; results in over- or under-calibration.

_5. Arbitrary Intervals —flexible; lacks systematic approach.

6_. No Periodic Intervals—useful as ’’calibrate before use" for

instruments seldom used, in storage, or requiring verification

immediately before each use.

_7. No Calibration—useful as "calibration not required" for

instruments which do not perform quantitative measurements.
Findings and Recommenda cions

(1) Finding

A calibration program which utilizes a systematic method of setting

intervals based on accumulation of performance data for each individual

instrument provides the best means for assuring instrument quality for

minimum cost.

Recommendations

The following should be discouraged:

© Setting the same interval for the entire instrument inventory.

• Adjusting intervals based on an instrument class, e.g., oscilloscopes or meters.

o Adjusting intervals by outside, e.g., user, evaluation.

© Arbitrary interval alteration in response to fiscal constraints.

(2) Finding

It was found that there are many successful calibration programs in

existence which implement interval adjustment based on instrument model number

or serial number. The details of the algorithms vary somewhat, but all consist of collection and analysis of data by serial number and subsequent interval

adjustment based on serial number or based on the accumulation of data for all

instruments of a given model number. This allows the implementation of trend

analysis for individual instrument performance and the ability to identify

problem instruments.
Recommendations

• Collection and retention of instrument performance data should

be organized on a serial number basis.

• Using the data collected, intervals should be adjusted on either

a serial number or a model number basis, depending on the needs

and requirements of the enacting facility. Factors to be considered in establishing a program include: reliability requirements, quality level of applications supported by PMTE, size of

the calibration program, availability of calibration support and

availability of administrative support.

• Consistent with program objectives, interval adjustment procedures

should be as flexible as possible in the establishment of intervals. If all intervals are set in multiples of a given number,

that number should be as small as practical.

(3) Finding

The three military services publish listings of calibration intervals for

a very large variety of PMTE. The listings, organized by model number, are

based on the individual military services’ analysis of instrument performance

of PMTE in their inventories.

Recommendation

If a facility has a limited statistical basis for setting an interval for

a particular instrument, or if the facility is not well equipped to develop an interval adjustment program, the intervals established by one of the military

services should be utilized. These intervals would also be convenient to use

as initial intervals in a program of interval adjustment by serial number. If

more than one interval is listed, the interval most closely associated in

application should be selected.

5.6
(4) Finding

During the site surveys, it was not clear that, in all cases, each agency

or facility had a sound' basis for calibration interval adjustment. If criteria

are not carefully set, instrument quality will be inadequate or the calibration

program will be unduly costly.

Recommendation

Methods for assessing optimum quality-level criteria should be developed

and disseminated.

(5) Finding

It was found that considerable variation exists in the manner in which

calibration program management information is accumulated and retained. In

some cases such information is non-existent. Most facilities deal with the

same kind of data (scheduled requirements, accomplishments, instrument intolerance data, cost data, etc.) but handle it in different ways so that it

is difficult for one Federal facility to benefit from the experience of

another. More importantly, facilities which do not accumulate such information cannot effectively assess or manage the effectiveness of their calibration

program.

Recommendation

A uniform calibration program management information system be developed

and implemented for use in Federal agencies.

5.7
(6) Finding

Most interval adjustment programs are based on the historical collection

of in- or out -of- tolerance data for an instrument; the broader the tolerance

limits, the longer the intervals. Most frequently, the tolerance limits are

taken to be the manufacturer's specifications, regardless of the actual use of

the instrument.

Rec ommendat ion

The use of broad tolerance limits and limited calibration should be

strongly encouraged. Calibration need only be done to the extent necessary to

meet the user's requirements.

(7) Finding

There is confusion created by the lack of common understanding of the

meaning of various technical and management terms related to calibration and

metrology

.

Recommendation

Standard calibration terminology should be developed and disseminated for

use throughout the Federal Government. Terms relating to calibration program

management should be included.

5.8
(8) Finding

From the questionnaire survey, it was found that there is a wide variation

in the intervals that are currently being assigned for the same model instruments

.

Recommendation

Further study should be undertaken t<3 determine why there is such a wide

variation in intervals assigned. Factors to be considered include interval

assignment method and instrument application.
inp

p
APPENDIX 6

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET

Federai Participation in Voluntary Standards

The Office of Management and Budget circular printed below, issued in its final form on 17 January 1980, lays out government policy for federal participation in the development

and application of voluntary standards: The text of the- circular is reprinted from the Federal Register of 21 January.

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT ANO

[budget

Office of Federai Procurement Policy

[Federal Participation in the

' Development and Use of Voluntary

Standards; Final Issuance

[agency; Office of Management and

~ Budget, Office of Federai Procurement

Policy.

I

act;on; Final Issuance of OMB Circular No. A-119.

summary; OMB Circular No. A-119 was

I

approved and issued by the Director of QMB on January 17. 1980. Developed

during the last three years, the Circular

provides policy guidance to Executive

Departments and Agencies in Iparticipating in the development of ^voluntary standards and in their subsequent use. Specifically, the jCircular encourages Federai

participation in. and support of. "voluntary standards-deveioping

activities when those activities are -conducted in accordance with specified

Irules assuring due process. The Circular

*also encourages Federal use of adequate

voluntary standards for procurement

-purposes. The Circular assigns to the Department cf Commerce an

Administrative and coordinating role for executive branch implementation of -those policies. Lhe'Circular is set forth below, in its entirety.

*FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Mr. David F. Baker. Deputy Assistant

(

Administrator for Logistics. telephone

202/395-7207.

James D. Currie. Acting Administrator.

jjCIrcular No. A-119J

Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voiuntar/

tcr.dards

Iar.uary 17, 1980.

1.

Purpose. This Circular establishes

I

oolicy to be followed by executive

branch agencies in working with

organizations which pian. develop,

produce, and coordinate voluntary

( standards for materials, products,

[systems, services, processes, and

MARCH 1980

practices. It also establishes policy to be

followed by executive branch agencies

in adopting and using such standards in procurement activities.

2. Background. The Federal

Government performs many functions

which involve the use of products and

services that depend upon reliable standards. Many standards for such

products and services, appropriate or adaptable for the Government’s

purposes, are developed and are

available from certain private

organizations, known as voluntary

standards bodies. Federal participation

in the standards-related activities of these voluntary bodies provides

incentives and opportunities to establish

standards that serve national needs. In addition. Federal use of voluntary

standards, whenever practicable and

appropriate, reduces the cost of developing and using standards and.

thereby, serves the public interest. Federal adoption of such standards, moreover, is consistent with, and in furtherance of. the Federal

Government's general policy of relying

upon the private sector to supply

Government needs for goods and

services, as enunciated in OMB Circular No. A—76.

3. Coverage. This Circular applies to

ail executive branch agency

participation in voluntary standards

activities, both domestic and

international, except as noted in paragraph 6, but does not apply to United States participation in multinational standards activities pursuant to treaties.

4. Definitions. As used in this Circular

a. Executive agency (hereinafter referred to as “agency"] means an

executive department, independent

commission, board, bureau, office, agency, Government-owned or controlled corporation or other

establishment of the the Federal

Government, including regulator/

commission or board, and also the municipal government of the District of Columbia. It does not include the

legislative or judicial branches of the Federal Government.

b. Standard means a prescribed set of

rules, conditions, or requirements

concerned with the definition of terms:

classification of components:

delineation of procedures: specification

of materials, performance, design, or operations: or measurement of quality

and quantity in describing materials,

products, systems, services, or practices

c. Voluntary standards are established generally by private sector bodies and are available for use by any

person or organization, private or governmental. The term includes what

are commonly referred to as "industry

standards" as well as "consensus

standards" but does not include

professional standards of personal

conduct, private standards of individual

firms, or standards mancated by law.

such as those contained in the United

States Pharmacopeia and the National

Formulary, as referenced in 21 U.S.C.

351.

d. Government standards include in- house and agency standards and

specifications as well as Federal and

Military standards and specifications.

e. Voluntary standards bodies ere

. nongovernmental bodies which are broadly based, multi-member, domestic

and multinational organizations

including, for exampie. nonprofit

organizations, industry association, and

professional technical societies which

develop, establish, or coordinate

voluntary standards.

/. Standards-deveioping groups are committees, boards, or any other

principal subdivisions of voluntary

standards bodies, established by such

bodies for the purpose of developing,

revising, or reviewing standards and

which are bound by the procedures of those bodies.

g. Secretary means the Secretary of

Commerce or that Secretary's designee.

5.

Policy. It is the general policy of the Federal Government to: a. Rely on voluntary standards both

domestic and international with respect

to Federal procurement, whenever

feasible and consistent with law and

regulation pursuant to law:

b. Participate in voluntary standards

bodies when such participation is in the public interest and is compatible with

agencies’ missions, authorities,

priorities, and budget limitations. Such

participation, however, is limited to those voluntary bodies that conduct

21
their standards activities in accordance

with the criteria listed in paragraph 6c. unless such participation is required by

law: and

c. Coordinate agency participation in voluntary standards bodies so that (1) the most effective use is made of Federal agency representatives: and (2) the views expressed by such

representatives are in the public interest and as a minimum, do not conflict with

the interests and established views of Federal agencies.

6. Policy Guidelines. In implementing

the policy established by this Circular,

agencies should recognize the positive

contribution of standardization and

related activities. When properly

conducted, standardization can increase

productivity and efficiency in industry,

expand opportunities for international

trade, conserve resources, and improve

health and safety. It also must be

recognized, however, that these

activities, if improperly conducted,

could suppress free and fair competition,

impede innovation and technical

progress, exclude safer and less expensive products, or otherwise

adversely affect trade, commerce,

health, or safety. Full account shall be

taken of the impact on the economy,

applicable Federal laws, policies, and

national objectives including, for example, laws and regulations relating

to antitrust, national security, smafl

business, product safety, environment,

and conflicts of interest. In light of these

considerations, the following policy

guidelines are established to assist and

govern implementation of the policy

enunciated in paragraph 5. except that

the provisions of paragraph 6c are not

applicable to Federal participation in multinational organizations which

develop and issue voluntary

international standards. It should also be noted that the provisions of this Circular are not intended to create delay

in the administrative process or provide new grounds for judicial review.

a. Reliance on Voluntary Standards in Federal Procurement.

(1)

Voluntary standards that will serve the agencies’ purposes and are

consistent with applicable laws and

regulations should be adopted, in whole

or in part, and used by Federal agencies

in the interests of greater economy and

efficiency. While it is recognized that, acceptable voluntary’ standards are mere likely to result when developed in accordance with the due process and

other basic criteria listed in paragraph

6.c. it is also recognized that suitable

voluntary standards have resulted and

will result from other developmental

processes. Consequently, it wouid not be in the public interest for these

guidelines to be interpreted as

prohibiting the use of suitable voluntary

standards merely because they were not developed in accordance with the

criteria contained in paragraph 6.c. Federal agencies may. therefore, adopt

and use such standards unless

specifically prohibited by law from

doing so. Voluntary standards will be

given preference over m-house

standards in the absence of mandatory

Government standards unless use of such voluntary standards would result

in impaired functional performance,’

unnecessary cost to the Government or

the Nation, anticompetitive effects or other significant disadvantages.

Agencies responsible for developing

Government standards will periodically

review their existing standards and

cancel those for which an adequate and

appropriate voluntary standard can be

substituted.

(2) Voluntary standards which are adopted by Federal agencies will be

cited, along with their dates cf issuance

and source of availability, in appropriate publications, regulatory

orders, and related in-house documents.

(3) Agencies will not be inhibited, if within their statutory authorities, from

developing and using in-house

standards in the event that voluntary

standards bodies cannot or do not develop a standard needed by, and

acceptable to. these agencies or do not do so in a timely fashion. Nor shall the policies contained in this Circular be

construed to commit any agency to the use of a voluntary standard which, after due consideration, is. in its opinion,

inadequate, does not meet statutory

criteria, or is otherwise inappropriate for

the agency concerned.

b. Participation in Voluntary

Standards Bodies.

(1) Participation by knowledgeable

Federal employees in the standards

activities of voluntary standards bodies

and standards-developing groups should

be actively encouraged and promoted by

Federal agency officials when such

participation is consistent with the provisions of paragraphs 5b and 6c.

(2) Federal employees who, at Government expense, participate in standards activities of voluntary

standards bodies and standardsdeveloping groups will do so as Federal

agency representatives and, as such,

must be authorized to participate by

appropriate agency officials.

(3) Federal agency participation in voluntary standards bodies and

standards-developing groups will not, of

itself, connote agency agreement with,

or endorsement of, decisions reached by

such bodies and groups or of standards

approved and published by voluntary

standards bodies.

(4) For procurement applications in 6.2

which Federal requirements are

consistent with those of the private

sector, participation by Federal agency

representative should be aimed at contributing to the development of voluntary standards which will eliminate the necessity for in-house

development of Federal standards for use in the procurement process.

(5) Federal agency representatives

serving as members of standardsdeveloping groups should participate

actively in the standards activities of those groups but in doing so. should not seek to dominate such groups. Active

participation is intended to include full involvement in discussions and

technical debates, registering of opinions and. if selected, serving as chairpersons or in other official capacities on such groups. Federal

agency representatives may vote at each

stage of standards development unless

specifically prohibited from domg so by

the head of the agency or that official's designee.

(6) The number of individual Federal

agency participants in a given voluntary

standards activity shall be kept to the minimum required for effective presentation of the various program,

technical, or other concerns of Federal

agencies.

(7) The granting of Federal support to a voluntary standards activity snail be

limited to that which is cieariy in furtherance of an agency's mission and

responsibility. Normally, the total amount of Federal support given shall be no greater than that of all nonFederal participants in that activity

except where it is m the direct and

predominant interest of the Federal

Government to deveiop a needed

standard or revision thereto and such

development appears unlikely to occur

in the absence of such Federal support.

The form of agency support, subject to legal and buaetary authority, may

extend to: (a) Direct financial support: e.g.. grants, sustaining memberships, and

contracts:

(b) Administrative support: e.g.. travel

costs, hosting of meetings, and

secretarial functions:

(c) Technical support: e.g., cooperative

testing for standards evaluation and

participation of agency personnel in the

activities of stancards-deveioping

groups; and

(d) Joint planning with voluntary

standards bodies to facilitate a coordinated effort in resolving priority

standardization problems.

(8) Participation by Federal agency

representatives in the policymaking

process of voluntary standards bodies is encouraged—particularly in matters such as establishing priorities,

developing procedures for preparing.

22 ASTM STANDARDIZATION NEV.’S
reviewing, and approving standards.

id creating standards-deveiopmg

aups. In order to maintain the private,

{nongovernmental nature of such bodies,

however. Federal agency

presentatives should refrain from

Rcisionmaking involvement in the

-internal day-to-day management of such

nodies (e.g., selection of salaried officers ;d employees, establishment of staff paries).

c. Identification of Voluntary

Standards Bodies for Federal

rticipation. As further described in pragraph 7a(2), the Secretary will jrepare and maintain a list of voluntary

ttandards bodies which wish to have

deral participation in their standards

Btivities and which conduct their

Activities in accordance with the due

irocess and other basic criteria E

ained in this paragraph. Voluntary

dards bodies must be listed as a

ondition to Federal participation

jiiiess such participation is required by

S

. The due process and other basic

sria to be adhered to by listed intary standards bodies are as oljows:

1

(1) That public notice of meetings and

ter standards activities is provided in appropriate and timely fashion: and.

o invite broadly-based representation.

I

ough media which are designed to ch those persons reasonably

lected to have an interest in the

subject. Interested persons may include,

•

example, consumers: small business cems; manufacturers: labor

. pliers: distributors; industrial, nstitutional and other users: (

vironmental and conservation groups:

d State and local procurement and

de officials. Such notices should

nciude a dear and meaningful

description of the purpose of the meeting

Bother proposed activity:

TM2) That public notice is given in an

appropriate and timely fashion of the

initiation, final review, and adoption or Bprovai of new and revised voluntary

Bndards. and the proposed withdrawal

of such standards, through media

i

haracterized in paragraph 6c(l). Such

Itice must clearly describe the purpose

|d scope of the relevant standards;

(3)

That meetings are open and that

i

articipation in standards activities is Bailable to interested persons, preasonable restrictions on

membership in standards-deveiopmg

t

jrnups by means of professional or hnical qualifications, trade uirements. unreasonable fees, or

er such restrictions must be avoided:

(4)

That decisions reached by

I

juntary standards bodies in their ndards activities represent

ostantial agreement, after a concerted

effort to resolve objections, and that ^tch agreements are reached by the

MARCH 1980

participants in accordance with the published procedures of the voluntary

standards body and the judgment of the

ofFicial(s) duly appointed by the voluntary standards body. Such

agreements imply more than a simple

majority but not necessarily unanimity;

(5) That prompt consideration is given

to the expressed views and concerns of

all interested parties including proposals

made for new or revised standards:

(6) That adequate and impartial

mechanisms for handling substantive

and procedural complaints and appeals

are in force for use by interested parties:

(7) That appropriate records, sufficient

to review and understand what

transpired, are maintained of formal

discussions, decisions, standards drafts,

technical or other rationale for critical requirements of standards, complaints/

appeals and their resolution, meeting

minutes and balloting results: and that such records are retained in accordance

with published procedures and are

readily accessible to ail interested

persons on a timely and reasonable

basis:

(8) That either a one-time written

policy statement is maintained in the

official procedures of the body or that standards literature published by the voluntary standards body specifically

state that participation by Federal

agency representatives in that body

does not constitute Government

endorsement of that body or the standards which it develops. A

voluntary standard which includes a list of its developers and identifies Federal

agency representation must include this disclaimer

(9) That voluntary standards bodies

publish their official procedures -and

make them available to interested,

parties on a reasonable basis:

(10) That voluntary standards are

periodically reviewed and revised, as necessary, and that participation in the review process is granted to all interested persons:

(11) That preference is given to the use of performance criteria in standards

development when such criteria may

reasonably be used in lieu of design,

materials, or construction criteria.

7. Responsibilities, a. The Secretary

will:

(1)

Coordinate and promote executive

branch implementation of the policy in paragraph 5, in accordance with the policy guidelines in paragraph S. The

Secretary will establish within nine

months of the date of this Circular:

(a) Written procedures, developed in such a manner as to allow for the participation of all interested parties, to implement the provisions of this Circular; and

(b) An Interagency Committee on

Standards Policy which the Secretary

6.3

may call upon when needed to assist in implementing the policy contained

herein. All executive branch agencies

having substantial standardization

involvement will be represented on that Committee and will cooperate with the Secretary, as requested, in carrying out

tasks assigned to the Committee.

(2) Develop and maintain current a list of voluntary standards bodies which

indicate a desire to be listed and which

certify to the Secretary that they are in compliance with the due process and

other basic criteria cited in paragraph 6c

and which provide published evidence

of such compliance. The list will be

published in the Federal Register and

will include the names of voluntary

standards bodies and those relevant

standards-deveiopmg groups in which

Federal participation is authorized. The

listing will net. however, include names

of units subordinate to standardsdeveioping groups. Cpon receipt of a specific challenge regarding

nonadherence to the due process and

other basic criteria, the Secretary will take appropriate steps to determine

whether a voluntary standards body or standards-deveiopmg group is. in fact, conducting its activities in accordance

with the aforecited criteria, the Secretary may call upon the Department

of Justice and the Federal Trade

Commission for assistance in establishing specific provisions for the due process and other basic criteria in paragraph 6c and in evaluating

adherence by voluntary standards

bodies to those provisions;

(3) Establish procedures by which the

listing of a voluntary standards body or standards-ceveloping group can be

challenged by interested persons. For purposes of this paragraph, each

standards-deveiopmg group may be

considered separately. Removal from

the list of a group does not automatically cail for the removal from

the list of all groups of the parent body,

or of the parent body itself. The

Secretary will establish procedures by

which:

(a) Such bodies and groups can be

removed from the list if a determination

is made by the Secretary that they are operating, and after appropriate-notice

continue to so operate, without benefit

of the due process and other basic

criteria cited in paragraph 6c.: (b) Federal agencies will be notified of such removal for the purpose of ceasing

their participation in the standards

activities of such bodies and groups:

(c) Pubiic notice will be provided of actions taken. Such procedures shall ensure that the rights of the body or group which is the subject ot the challenge are comparable to these

granted to challengers; and

23
(d) Voluntary standards bodies which

have been delisted or have had one or more standards-developing groups

delisted by the Secretary may reapply

for listing for themselves or for their standards-developing groups.

(4) Establish and maintain current, with the cooperation of Federal

agencies, a central public register of all voluntary standards activities in which

Federal agencies participate:

(5) Establish and maintain current, a comprehensive and consolidated listing,

cross-referenced by subject, of standards developed by voluntary

standards bodies and by Federal

agencies. Such listing of standards

developed by bodies other than Federal

agencies shall not necessarily constitute

Government endorsement thereof:

(6) Establish a program which shall make available a department-sponsored

voluntary dispute resolution service for the rapid handling of procedural

complaints by interested parties against

listed voluntary standards bodies. As a precondition to invoking that service, a complainant must seek relief from, and

nave exhausted all available sources of remedy within, the affected voluntary

standards body. Such a service shall have, among its requirements, the agreement of both complama.nt and

respondent to use the service and their * consent to accept the determinations of

the service as the soie and final administrative review by the executive

branch:.

(7)

Report annually to the Office of Management and Budget concerning

agency implementation of this Circular.

b. The heads of executive agencies

concerned with standards and

standardization activities will:

(1)

Implement the policy in paragraph

5 of this Circular in accordance with the policy guidelines in paragraph 6 and the procedures to be established bv the Secretary within 120 days of the issuance of those procedures:

(2)

Establish appropriate procedures

to ensure that:

(a) Agency representatives refrain from participating in the standards

activities of voluntary standards bodies

and standards-developing groups which

are not listed by the Secretary of Commerce as conducting themselves in accordance with the due process and

other basic criteria cited in paragraph

6c. unless such participation is specifically mandated by law;

(b) Agency representatives on

voluntary standards bodies are familiar

with the due process and other basic

criteria contained in paragraph 6c. and

that agency representatives who learn of an apparent infringement of the aforecited criteria by a listed voluntary

standards body or standards-developing

group register their questions and

concerns with that body or group and

with their agencies: and

(c) The Secretary is notified of such

incidents of apparent noncompliance

with the aforecited due process and

other basic criteria by a listed voluntary

standards body:

(3) Establish appropriate procedures

by which agency representatives

participating in voluntary standards

bodies and standards-developing groups

will, to the extent possible, ascertain the views of the agency on matters of paramount interest and will, as a minimum, express views which are not

inconsistent or in conflict with

established agency views:

(4) Endeavor, when two or more

agencies participate in a given voluntary

standards body or standards-developing

group, to coordinate the views of their respective agencies on matters of paramount importance so as to present

a single, unified position reflective of the public interest. In instances where

agreement is not reached by the affected

agencies, such agencies wil'l notify the Secretary who shall designate a lead agency. The lead agency will be

responsible for developing a unified position on the important matter at issue. In so doing, that designated lead

agency will consider carefully the views

of the other participating Federal

agencies:

(5) Provide for participation in the Interagency Committee on Standards

Policy to be established by the Secretary

and cooperate with the Secretary, as requested, in carrying out the mission of

that Committee:

(6) Consult with the Secretary in the development and issuance of agenev

regulations implementing this Circular,

and submit, in response to the request of

the Secretary, reports on the status of agency interaction with voluntary

standards bodies.

3. Reporting Requirements. One year

from the date of issuance of this Circular, and each year thereafter, the Secretary will submit to the Office of Management and Budget a report on the status of Federal interaction with

voluntary standards bodies. As a minimum, the report will include the following information:

a. The nature and extent of Federal

agency participation in. and support of. voluntary standards bodies:

b. A summary of the nature of procedural complaints against listed voluntary standards bodies in accordance with the Drogram to be

developed, and a summary of the disposition of such complaints: and

c. An evaluation of the etiectiveness

of the policy promulgated in this Circular and recommendations for change or modification, as appropriate.

9. Inquiries. For information

concerning this Circular, contact the Office of Management and Buceet.

Office of Federal Procurement Policy,

telephone 202/395-7207.

James T. McIntyre. Jr.. Director.

|FR Doc 80-1815 rilea 1-18-60: 8:45 am| BILLING COOE 3110-01-U


Department of

Commerce

Office of the Secretary

Implementation of Federal Voluntary

Standards Policy; Proposed Procedures

for Listing Voluntary Standards Bodies

Eligible for Federal Agency Support and

Participation, and for a Department

Sponsored Voluntary Dispute Resolution

Service for Procedural Complaints

Against Listed Voluntary Standards

Bodies
U/U/4 hoilcr.nl Register / Vol. 45. No. 107 / Monday. Juno 2. 1900 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Office of the Secretary

15 CFR Part 19

Implementation of Federal Voluntary

Standards Policy; Proposed

Procedures for Listing Voluntary

Standards Bodies Eligible for Federal

Agency Support and Participation, and

for a Department Sponsored Voluntary

Dispute Resolution Service for Procedural Complaints Against Listed

Voluntary Standards Bodies

agency: Assistant Secretary for Productivity. Technology and

Innovation. Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed procedures.

summary: Under the provisions of

Circular A-119 issued by the Office of Management and Budget on January 17, 1930. entitled. “Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary

Standards," the Department is proposing

procedures required by the Circular to implement the policy relating to Federal

agency participation in and support of voluntary standards organizations. The

Secretary, through this notice, is requesting comments on the proposed

procedures for listing and delisting

voluntary standards bodies and their standards-developing groups and on the proposed procedures for a voluntary

dispute resolution service for the rapid

handling of procedural complaints by

interested parties against voluntary

standards bodies listed by the Department.

pates: Written comments are due on or before August 1 . 1980. All comments

should be submitted in four copies.

address: Comments should be mailed

to Dr. Jordan J. Baruch. Assistant

Secretary for Productivity, Technology

and Innovation. Room 3864. U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington.

D.C. 20230: or delivered to Room 3864,

Main Commerce Building. 14th Street between Constitution and Pennsylvania

Avenues. N.W., between 8:30 and 5:00 p.m. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dr. Howard I. Forman. Deputy Assistant

Secretary for Product Standards Policy.

Room 3876. U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington. D.C. 20230. telephone (202) 377-3221: or Mr. Donald

R. Mackay. Office of Product Standards

Policy. Room 3876. U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington. D.C. 20230. telephone (202) 377-4562.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Office of Management and Budget

issued Circular A-119 on January 17. 1980. entitled “Federal Purticipation in the Development and Use of Voluntary

Standards" (45 F.R. 4326. January 21. 1980). This Circular establishes policy

guidance governing executive branch

participation In voluntary standards

activities and encourages the use of

acceptable voluntary standards in the Federal procurement process. The

Circular encourages Federal agencies to support and paticipate in the activities of those standards bodies which adhere

to specified due process and other basic

criteria. The OMB Circular assigns to the Department of Commerce responsibility

for the administration of specified

provisions of the Circular and the responsibility for coordinating the executive branch implementation of the

policies established by the Circular. In

particular, the Circular, in subsections

7a(l)(b) and 7a(2) and (3). provides for the establishment of procedures for the

listing of voluntary standards bodies

which comply with the due process and

other basic criteria cited in the Circular.

The Circular, in subsections 7a(l)(b) and

7a(6). also provides for the establishment of procedures for a department-sponsored voluntary dispute

resolution service for the handling of

procedural complaints against a listed voluntary standards body.

Policy

The OMB Circular emphasizes

Federal policy of relying on voluntary

standards with respect to Federal

procurement whenever feasible and

consistent with law and regulation. The

OMB Circular establishes a policy

encouraging the participation of Federal

agencies and their representatives in voluntary standards bodies which

conduct their standards activities in accordance with specified due process

and other critieria and which are listed by the Department of Commerce after certifying that they comply with all of

the due process and other critiera established in the Circular.

The Proposed Procedures

Subpart A of Pert 19 is proposed to establish procedures by which voluntary

standards bodies and their standardsdeveloping groups can be listed by the Secretary of Commerce. This subport 1) describes the steps to be taken by the standards bodies and groups in applying

for listing. 2) identifies the due process

and other criteria which such bodies

and groups must follow. 3) describes the steps to be taken by the Department of

Commerce in processing requests for

listing. 4) establishes procedures for

delisting organizations which are subsequently found, upon specific

challenge, not to be complying with all of the specified criteria, and 5) provides

for the rcnpplication for listing of bodies

or groups which have been delisted.

The procedures proposed by the Department of Commerce allow a voluntary standards body to apply for

listing for itself and all of its standardsdeveloping groups or to apply for listing

either alone or in conjunction with some

of its standards-developing groups

provided that the body and the

identified standards-developing groups

comply with the prescribed due process

and other basic criteria. A voluntary

standards body has to be listed in order

to have its standards-developing groups

listed. If the standards body is not listed. Federal agencies will be prohibited from

participating in the activities of any of

its boards, councils, committees, or standards-developing groups, and will be prohibited from providing any type of

financial, administrative, technical, or other support to that body or its groups. The proposed Subpart A also provides

for the voluntary as well as the involuntary termination of listing by a voluntary standards body or of any of

its groups. The removal of the name of

any body or group will automatically

terminate the involvement of Federal

agency representatives in the standards

activities of those bodies or groups and,

further, will terminate any Federal

support being provided to those bodies

or groups. Subpart B of Part 19 proposes

procedures for a voluntary dispute

resolution service for the timely

settlement of complaints pertaining to the procedural aspects of actions or lack

of actions on standards by listed voluntary standards bodies.

The proposed procedures require as a

precondition to invoking the service,

that a complainant must have exhausted

all available sources of remedy from

within the voluntary standards body.

Also, both the complainant and the respondent must agree to use the service

and to accept the determinations by the service as the sole and final administrative review by the executive

branch of the Federal Government.

Under the proposed dispute resolution

service, the Department will: (1) consider the processing pursuant to these procedures of all bona fide procedural complaints against listed voluntary standards bodies which are received from interested parties and

which, in the opinion of the department,

appear to be capable of resolution in the public interest under these procedures:
Federal Renter / Vol. 45. No. 107 / Monday. June 2, 1900 / Proposed Rules 37375

(2) provide in the first instance for informal conciliation efforts wherein all parties agree to discuss the complaint

together with a representative of the- department, seek to identify and clarify the specific issues under disagreement,

and discuss those issues openly in an

attempt informally to arrive at a mutually acceptable resolution: (3) provide for mediation services, in cases where conciliation fails; (4) publicize the

facts and results of appropriate cases

processed under these procedures; and

(5) monitor any follow-up action taken,

by the complainant and/or the respondent voluntary standards body

pursuant to these procedures, for the primary purpose of assessing the effectiveness of the service. The Department will accept

complaints only against voluntary

standards bodies or standardsdeveloping groups thereof which are

listed by the Secretary under the Department of Commerce’s “Procedures

for Listing and Delisting Voluntary

Standards Bodies and Their StandardsDeveloping Groups” (15 CFR Part 19,

Subpart A).

Additional Information

In preparing these proposed

procedures, discussions were held with

representatives of the following

organizations (listed alphabetically):

Aerospace Industries Association;

Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration

Institute; American Chemical Society;

American Gas Association; American

GearManufacturers Association;

American Institute of Aeronautics and

Astronautics; .American National

Standards Institute: American Nuclear

Society; American Petroleum Institute: American Public Health Association;

American Society for Testing and

Materials; American Society of Agricultural Engineers; American

Society of Heating. Refrigerating, and

Air-Conditioning Engineers: American

Society of Mechanical Engineers:

American Water Works Association:

Association for the Advancement of

Medical Instrumentation; Association of

Home Appliance Manufacturers:

Composite Can and Tube Institute: Computer and Business Equipment

Manufacturers Association: Consumers

Union; Electronic Industries

Association: Gas Appliance

Manufacturers Association: Industrial

Heating Equipment Association:

Institute of electrical and Electronics

Engineers: International Brotherhood of

Electrical Workers: National Consumers

League: National Council on Fair

Standards; National Electrical Manufacturers Association; National

Fire Protection Association; Office of the

Special Assistant to the President for Consumer Affairs: Production Systems

for Architects und Engineers (A1A);

Rubber Maoufacturcrs Association:

Society of Automotive Engineers;

Society of the Plastics Industry; Steel

Joist Institute: Underwriters

Laboratories: and Vacuum Cleaner

Manufacturers Association.

As the representatives of the organizations identified above were

advised at the informal meetings, their participation in those meetings was not

to be construed as any form of

endorsement of the proposed procedures

by the individuals involved or by the - organizations they represented.

The Department has chosen to publish

these proposed procedures for the purpose of soliciting public comment

and is allowing sixty (60) days from the date of this publication for the submission of those comments. A public

docket will be available for examination

by interested persons at the Central

Reference and Records Inspection

Facility, Room 5317, U.S. Department of

Commerce.

Dated: May 27, 1980. Jordan J. Baruch,

Assistant Secretaryfor Productivity,

Technology, Innovation.

It is proposed to amend Subtitle A of

Title 15, Code of Federal Regulations, by

adding Part 19 as follows:

PART 19—FEDERAL INTERACTION

WITH VOLUNTARY STANDARDS

BODIES

Subpart A—Procedures for Listing and

Delisting Voluntary Standards Bodies and

Their Standards-Developing Groups

Sec. 19.1 Purpose

19.2 Goal of Procedures

19.3 Coverage

19.4 Definitions

19.5 Effective Date

19.6 Listing Requirements

19.7 Listing Process

19.8 Delisting Process

19.9 Voluntary Termination of Listing 19.10 Reapplication

19.11-19.20 [Reserved]

Subpart B—Procedures for a Voluntary

Dispute Resolution Service (or the Rapid

Handling of Procedural Complaints by

Interested Parties Against Voluntary

Standards Bodies Listed by the Department

of Commerce

19.21 Purpose

19.22 Objective of Procedures

19.23 Definition

19.24 Precondition to Submitting Complaint

19.25 Limitation

19.20 Submitting a Complaint

19217 Action Upon Receipt of Complaint

Sec.

19.28 Responsibility of Comploinant and

Respondent if a Complaint is Accepted

by the Department

19.29 Investigation/Conciliation

19.30 Mediation

19.31 - Publications and Records

19.32 Technical Referee Service

19.33-19.40 (Reserved 1 Authority: Section 7 of the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-U9.

issued pursuant to Section 8 of Pub. i_ 93—400

(41 U.S.C 405). Subpart A—Procedures for Listing and

Delisting Voluntary Standards Bodies

and Their Standards-Developing

Groups

§ 19.1 Purpose.

(a) The purpose of this subpart is to establish procedures for the Development and maintenance by the

Secretary of Commerce of a list of

voluntary standards bodies in which

Federal executive agencies may

participate and provide support. To be^

considered for listing, and to remain

listed, voluntary standards bodies and

their standards-developing groups must

adhere to certain due process and other

basic criteria. These criteria are

specified in Section 6c of the Office of

Management and Budget Circular A-119

of January 17, 1980. entitled, "Federal

Participation in the Development and

Use of Voluntary Standards" (45 FR

4326, January 21. 1980). These criteria are also described in § 19.6(b).

(b) Nothing in these procedures shall be interpreted as providing any party

with an opportunity to unreasonably

delay, inhibit, or otherwise interfere

with the normal and lawful process of

voluntary standardization, or any action

available under the law with respect to any matter involving the establishment

or use of voluntary standards.

§ 19.2 Goal of procedures.

The Secretary has been directed by

paragraphs 7a (2) and (3) of Circular A119 to prepare and implement these

procedures. The goal of these

procedures is to strengthen the private sector voluntary standards system by

providing Federal agency participation

in and support of voluntary standards

programs and by encouraging Federal

agency reliance on the standards

developed by that system.

§ 19.3 Coverage.

As specified in Section 3 of Circular

A-119. the procedures of this subpart

apply to all executive agency

participation in U.S. domestic voluntary

standards activities including the development of U.S. positions relating to international voluntary standards

activities. The procedures do not apply

to direct participation in multinational
3737G Federal Register / Vol. 45. No. 107 / Monday, June 2. 1000 / Proposed Rules

organizations, including regional and

international organizations, which

develop and issue international

standards, in accordance with Section 6

of Circular A-119. (For the purposes of these procedures, building code

organizations are not considered to be

voluntary standards bodies if either of

the following criteria is met: (1) the voting membership of the building code

organization is composed entirely of government officials; or (2) the building

code organization references or adopts

voluntary standards developed and

issued by other organizations and does

not itself develop standards.)

§ 19.4 Definitions. As used in this subpart;

(a) Executive agency (hereinafter referred to as “agency" or “Federal

agency") means an executive

department, independent commission,

board, bureau, office, agency, Government-owned or controlled corporation or other establishment of

the Federal Government, including a regulatory commission or board, and

also the municipal government of the

District of Columbia. It does not include

the legislative or judicial branches of the Federal Government.

(b) Standard means a prescribed set of rules, conditions, or requirements

concerned with: the definition of terms;

classification of components;

delineation of procedures; specification of materials, performance, design, or operations; or measurement of quality

and -quantity in describing materials,

products, systems, services, or practices.

(c) Voluntary standards are established generally by private sector bodies and are available for use by any

person or organization, private or governmental. The term includes what

are commonly referred to as “industry

standards" as well as "consensus

standards" but does not include

professional standards of personal

conduct, private standards of individual

firms, or standards mandated by law,

such as those contained in the United

States Pharmacopeia and the National

Formulary, as referenced in 21 U.S.C.

251.

(d) Voluntary standards bodies are nongovernmental bodies which are broadly based, multi-membcred

organizations including, for example,

nonprofit organizations, industry

associations, and professional and/or * technical societies which develop,

establish, or coordinate voluntary

standards.

(e) Standards-developing groups are committees, boards, or any other

principal subdivisions of voluntary

standards bodies, established by such

bodies for the purpose of developing,

revising, or reviewing standards and

which are bound by the procedures of

those bodies. (In the case of a voluntary

standards organization that is completely autonomous, operates under

Its own procedures, and accepts

responsibility for enforcing compliance

with its procedural requirements a3 well

as the responsibility for assuring the technical adequacy of its standards,

such an organization, will be considered

as both a voluntary standards body and

a standards-developing group, at the request of the organization. For the purpose of these procedures, such

organizations will meet all of the due

process and other criteria established

herein.)

(f) Department means the Department

of Commerce.

(g) Secretary means the Secretary of

Commerce of the Secretary’s designee.

(h) Federal agency participation in . listed voluntary standards bodies means

the direct and formal involvement in the standards development process and the provision for support to that process in terms of: (1) direct financial support

such as grants, sustaining membership,

and contracts: (2) administrative support

such as travel costs, hosting of meetings,

and secretarial functions; (3) technicall

support such as cooperative testing for standards evaluation and participation

of agency personnel in the activities of standards-developing groups; and (4) joint planning with voluntary standards

bodies to facilitate a coordinated effort

in resolving priority standardization

problems.

(i) Consumer means a user of the products or services for which a standard is developed who is not

currently engaged in the manufacture or

distribution of the same, or involved in the development, issuance, or enforcement of government regulations

related to the same.

(j) Person means associations,

companies, corporations, institutions,

partnerships, societies, firms,

government agencies at the Federal.

State, and local level, and individuals.

§ 19.5 Effective date. This subpart shall become effective

thirty (30) days after the date of

publication of the final procedures in the Federal Register. The Secretary will publish the first Federal Registor notice

of listed bodies and their listed groups

within four months after the effective

date of this subpart. Federal agencies

will not participate in or otherwise

support (as defined in 19.4(h) above) any

voluntary standards body or standardsdeveloping group which is not listed (unless such participation is otherwise

specifically mandated by law),

beginning ninety (90) days after the

Secretary publishes the first Federal

Register notice which identifies listed voluntary standards bodies and their

listed standards-developing groups, and

as prescribed by Section 7(b)(2)(a) of Circular A-119. A voluntary standards

body which submits its application and

certification within sixty (60) days

immediately following the effective date

of these procedures will be considered

for inclusion in the first list issued by

the Secretary.

§ 19.6 Listing requirements.

(a) Any voluntary standards body

which wishes to be listed must apply for

listing and certify in writing to the Secretary that it complies with all of the due process and other basic criteria identified in paragraph (b) of this section. This certification must contain a statement that the standards body

conducts its standards activities entirely

in accordance with its published

procedures. Requests to be listed, and

accompanying certifications, shall be

signed by a person who, in the normal

course of the requestor’s business, has

the authority to make binding statements on the requestor’s behalf.

Requests shall be addressed to the Secretary of Commerce. U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington.

D.C. 20230.

(1) Category A. Listing. For this category, all of the voluntary’ standardsdeveloping groups of a voluntary

standards body must meet the due

process and other basic criteria identified in paragraph (b) of this section. In applying for Category A

listing the voluntary standards body

must, if it has standards-developing

groups, state that all of those groups

comply with such criteria, and must

provide a list of all such groups. New

standards-developing groups formed

after the initial listing (under Category

A) of a voluntary standards body by the Department must be reported to the Department by the standards body

concerned as complying with the criteria

in paragraph (b) of this section. In a Category A listing, the voluntary

standards body and all of its standardsdeveloping groups (if any) wiil be listed. Voluntary standards bodies listed in Category A will be eligible for the types

of Federal support described in paragraph (h) of § 19.4. Federal agency

representatives will be able to participate in the activities of the committees, boards and councils of

those voluntary standards bodies listed

in Category A as well as in the activities

7.4
Federal Register / Vol. 45. No. 107 / Monday. June 2. 1900 / Proposed Rules 37377

of the standards-devcloping groups of

those bodies.

(2)

Category B. Listing. This category

allows for situations in which a voluntary standards body wishes to have only some of its voluntary

standards-devcloping groups listed. Since not all of the groups are listed, the

voluntary standards body itself cannot

be listed except in conjunction with a

particular standards-developing group

thereof. In Category B listing, the name

of the voluntary standards body and the name of the standards-developing

groups to be listed are identified

together. For example, if the “Acme

Standards-Developing Body” has five standards-developing groups, but wishes

that only the groups on ‘widgets’ and

‘gidgets’ should be listed, that body

would apply for listing as follows:

(i) Acme Standards Body/StandardsDeveloping Group on ‘Widgets'

(ii) Acme Standards Body/StandardsDeveloping Group on ‘Gidgets’

An effect of this type of listing is that while Federal agencies may participate

in and otherwise render support to the two listed groups (on ‘widgets' and

rgfdgets’J, they may participate in and

render support to the Acme Standards

Body itself only insofar as that participation and support relate to the standards activities of the two groups. Accordingly, Federal agencies may not

participate, for example, on the Board of

Directors (or similar governing or advisory unit) of the Acme Voluntary

Standards Body itself, since some of its standards-developing groups are not

listed. In such cases. Federal agencies

should endeavor to provide financial

and other support directly to the listed groups. If for procedural or administrative reasons this is not

possible. Federal agencies should only

provide support to the standards body

with the understanding that such

contributions are to be expended

directly on matters related to these two

listed groups.

(b) The following due process and

other basic criteria shall be adhered to by listed voluntary standards bodies

and the listed standards-developing

groups of those bodies:

(1) Voluntary standards bodies shall provide adequate public notice of

standards meetings and other standards

activities (e.g. regional conferences)

sponsored or conducted by the bodies or

their standards-devcloping groups. Such

notices shall be provided in an

appropriate and timely fashion und

should include a clear and meaningful

description of the purpose of the meeting

or activity. The media used for those

notices shail be selected or devised to

reach persons reasonably expected to have an interest in the subject including,

for example: consumers: small business

representatives: manufacturers; labor;

suppliers: distributors: testing

laboratories: industrial, institutional,

and other users; environmental and

conservation groups: Federal agency

officials; and State and local regulatory,

procurement and code officials. The

notice shall also identify the name,

address, and telephone number of a

contact person or office in the voluntary

standards body who/which will be able

to provide, upon request, further

information on the meeting or activity.

(2) Voluntary standards bodies shall provide adequate public notice in an

appropriate and timely fashion of the

initiation, final review, adoption or approval of all new and revised

voluntary standards, and of the proposed withdrawal of voluntary

standards through media characterized

in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. Such

notice must describe clearly the purpose

and scope of the relevant standards.

As required in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the standards body reasonably

must assure itself that the public notice

will reach interested persons in an

appropriate and timely fashion and will identify a contact person or office in the standards body. The same media,

publications and format should be used

for notices having the same or similar

scope or impact.

(3) Voluntary .standards bodies shall conduct open standards meetings, and

shall ensure that the opportunity for attendance at these meetings and

participation in related standards

activities is available to interested persons. Voluntary standards bodies

shall provide, at a minimum, an

opportunity to all interested persons to participate in standards. activities through the submission of written

comments relating to the initiation,

development, approval, review, revision,

or withdrawal of standards. All such

written comments received by a voluntary standards body should be

acknowledged and transmitted to the appropriate standards-developing group’

for due consideration. Unreasonable

restrictions on membership in standards-developing groups by means

of requirements for professional or

technical qualifications, or of trade

requirements, or of unreasonable fees, or of other such restrictions must be <=r- avoided.

(4) Voluntary standards bodies shall assure that decisions reached in- their standards development activities represent substantial agreement of those

who participated in the process, after.

a

concerted effort to resolve objections.

7.5

and that such agreements are reached

by the participants in accordance with

the published procedures of the

voluntary standards body and the

judgment of the appropriate official(s)

duly appointed by that body. Such

agreements shall be reached by more ^ than a sample majority, although they

do not necessarily require unanimity.

(5) Voluntary standards bodies shall provide prompt consideration of the

views and concerns expressed in writing

by all interested parties to the voluntary

standards body, including proposals for new or revised standards.

(6) Voluntary standards bodies shall provide or otherwise make available one or more adequate and impartial

mechanisms for handling documented

substantive and procedural complaints

and appeals for use by interested

parties. As an alternative, this requirement will be satisfied by a provision for ready access to such

complaint/appeal mechanisms operated

by an organization other than the one

against which the complaint or appeal is lodged, provided that such mechanisms

meet the requirements of this paragraph

(§ 19.6(b)(6)).

(7) Voluntary standards bodies shall assure that appropriate records, in

sufficient detail to enable one

subsequently to review and understand

what transpired, are made and

maintained in the case of: formal

discussions: decisions; standards and

drafts of standards; technical or other

rationale for critical requirements of

standards (including test methods):

complaints/appeals and their resolution;

meeting minutes and balloting' results. All such records must be retained in accordance with published procedures

and be readily accessible to all interested persons on a timely and

reasonable basis. Retention of records

for at least five (5) years after a standard is approved, reviewed, revised,

or withdrawn, normally would be

considered reasonable. The “rationale”

referred to above should be prepared

during the standards development

process to document the decisions

relating to (i) the need for the standard,

(ii) the scope of the standard (including

any limits or exclusions), (iii) the critical requirements established in the standard, and (iv) the test methods

selected to determine conformance or non-conformance.

(8) Voluntary standards bodies shall publish a disclaimer clearly indicating

that participation in any of their activities by Federal agency

representatives does not constitute the

endorsement by the Federal

Government or any of its agencies of the

bodies or the standards which they

f-t j ,1 A . i i • 1 • •
37378 Federal Resistor / Vol. 45, No. 107 / Monday. June 2. 1900 / Proposed. Rules

develop. The disclaimer shall either (i) be in tho form of an official policy

declaration by the standards bodies

prominently set forth in their published

official procedures: or (ii) be in the form

of an official policy declaration by the standards bodies in any standards

literature which they publish that mentions involvement or participation of

Federal agency personnel in standards

development, approval, or review

activities. A voluntary standard or other

document which includes a list of its developers and identifies Federal

agency representation must include this disclaimer.

(9) Voluntary standards bodies shall publish their official procedures

regarding their standards activities, and

make those procedures available to interested parties on a reasonable basis.

(10) Voluntary standards bodies shall ensure that their voluntary standards

and their standards development

procedures are periodically reviewed

and revised, as necessary, and that participation in the review process is available to all interested persons in accordance with the other relevant due

process and other criteria contained in paragraph (b) of this section. A review

of each standard by an appropriate

committee or other unit of the standards

bodies should be initiated at least once

every five years. If a voluntary • standards body provides for the withdrawal of a standard under

procedures that cause the automatic

termination of standards which are five years old or older and are not either

revised or reaffirmed, the standards

body shall provide adequate public

notice of the imminent termination in accordance with the requirements in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.

(11) Voluntary standards bodies shall give preference to the use of performance criteria, measurable by

examination or testing, in standards

development when such criteria may

reasonably be used in lieu of design,

materials, or construction criteria. For

purposes of demonstrating compliance

with this requirement, as a minimum,

the published operating procedures of

the voluntary standards body should

contain a statement to the effect that "preference will be given to the use of

performance criteria, measurable by

examination or testing, in standards

development when such criteria may

reasonably be used in lieu of design,

materials, or construction criteria."

(c) In applying to the Secretary for a Category A listing, a voluntary

.standards body must certify that it and

all of i'.s standards-developing groups

meet the due process and other basic

criteria identified above in paragraph (b)

of this section and shall include with its application its official operating

procedures, as published pursuant to paragraph (b)(9) of this section. In applying for a Cagetory D listing a voluntary standards body must certify that all of its identified standardsdeveloping groups for which it seeks

listing meet the due process and other

basic criteria identified above in paragraph (b) of this section and shall include with its application its official operating procedures. In applying for a Category A or B listing, the voluntary

standards body should, in order to assist the Secretary in reviewing the

application, list the paragraph or section

numbers of its published operating

procedures which correspond to each of

the numbered paragraphs in paragraph

(b) of this section.

(d) The voluntary standards body

shall transmit to the Department copies

of all subsequent changes in its official procedures as soon as they have been

approved by the body.

(e) The Secretary will provide, upon

request or when he otherwise detemines

it to be necessary and appropriate,

guidance as to whether specific

procedural requirements of voluntary

standards bodies or their standardsdeveloping groups will meet the due

process and other criteria established in paragraph (b) of this section. Such

guidance with be published through

notices in the Federal Register, either in

full, or in summary form. If published in summary form, the notice will specify

the manner in which persons may obtain

copies of the full guidance provided.

§ 19.7 Listing process.

(a) The Department will review the published operating procedures

submitted by the voluntary standards

body and the Secretary will determine

whether such procedures demonstrate

compliance with the due process and

other basic criteria of paragraph (b) of

§ 19.6. If a voluntary standards body

certifies that it does conform to the

criteria set forth in paragraph (b) of

§ 19.6, the Secretary will list it unless,

upon review of the operating procedures

submitted by the body, it is clear that

the body does not conform.

(b) The Secretary will notify the applicant of a proposed denial of the

listing application. That notice will state the specific reasons for the proposed

denial.

(1)

A voluntary standards body may

request reconsideration of its application for listing by submitting such

request within thirty (30) days of receipt

of the Secretary's notice of a proposed

denial of the listing application. Such

request for reconsideration shall be

accornpanied by a detailed statement of

the reasons for reconsideration. If upon

reconsideration, the determination to deny the applicant's request for listing is unchanged, or if reconsideration is not

requested, the proposed denial shall become final thirty (30) days after the issuance of a denial decision to the voluntary standards body, provided that the body does not request a hearing

within the thirty (30) day period.

(2) If, however, the voluntary

standards body requests a hearing

within the thirty (30) day period

following the issuance of the denial

decision, a hearing under 5 U.S.C. 556

* (the section of the Administrative

Procedure Act which establishes

requirements for formal hearings

conducted by a Federal Administrative

Law Judge) will be ordered and the decision on the proposed denial shall be

stayed pending the outcome of that hearing. A request for such a hearing

shall be addressed to the Secretary of

Commerce. U.S. Department of

Commerce, Washington, D.C. 20230. In the event of such a request, the « Secretary will designate an

Administrative Law Judge to conduct

proceedings under 5 U.S.C. 556. Following the conclusion of the Administrative Law Judge's

proceedings, and upon receipt of his

recommendations, the Secretary will

render a written decision and will notify

the standards body of that decision.

(3) A voluntary standards body may,

within thirty (30) days of receipt of a notice of a proposed denialof the listing

application, submit to the Secretary

draft amendments to their procedures in an effort to conform to the requirements

of paragraph (b) of § 19.6. Lf the Secretary finds that the draft amendments will meet the requirements

of paragraph (b) of § 19.6, the Secretary

will notify the voluntary standards body

and will stay further action on the proposed denial of the listing

application. Upon receipt of the amended procedures, as approved and

published by the voluntary standards

body, the Secretary will reconsider the application for listing and. if the amended procedures are found to conform to the requirements of

paragraph (b) of § 19.6. the Secretary

will proceed to list the standards body.

(4) If upon receipt of the draft amended procedures, the Secretary

finds that the subject procedures still do

not conform to the requirements of

paragraph (b) § 19.6. the Secretary will notify the applicant of a proposed denial

of the listing application with a statement of the reasons therefore. Within thirty (30) days of the notice of a

7.6
Federal Register / Vol. 45, No. 107 / Monday, June 2, 1900 / Proposed Rules 37379

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I.

I

I

I

I

i

*

*

proposed denial, the voluntary

standards body may request a consultation with the Secretary for the

purpose of developing specific

amendments to their procedures that

will conform to the requirements of paragraph (b) of § 19.6. If the parties

involved in such consultation determine

that acceptable amendments cannot be

developed, the voluntary standards

body may request reconsideration under

paragraph (b)(1) of this section. If the consultation results in the development

of an amendment acceptable to the Secretary, the Secretary will reconsider

the application for listing and. if the amended procedures, as approved and

published by the voluntary standards

body, are found to conform to the requirements of paragraph (b) of § 19.6, the Secretary will proceed to list the standards body.

(5) If the proposed amendment does

not conform to the requirements of

paragraph (b) of § 19.6. and no

consultation is requested within thirty

(30) days of receipt of a notice of a proposed denial, and no request for reconsideration is filed within the same

thirty (30) day period, the denial will become final thirty (30) days after the issuance of a denial decision to the voluntary standards body. The

voluntary standards body may. at any

time thereafter, reapply for listing under

the provisions of § 19.10.

(c) The Secretary will list those

voluntary standards bodies and those

standards-developing groups for which

the certification and the published

operating procedures provide evidence

of compliance with the criteria contained in paragraph (b) of § 19.6. The

Secretary will inform in writing all those

voluntary standards bodies which have

been listed. The operating procedures

and any other evidence submitted by

the standards bodies on which the decisions are made to list the bodies

and groups w'ill be available in the Department for public inspection.

(d) The Secretary, within

approximately four months after the

effective date of these Procedures, will publish in the Federal Register a notice

which identifies the listed voluntary

standards bodies and the listed standards-developing groups. Subsequent listings will be published on

a quarterly basis for approximately two

years, and semiannually thereafter in accordance with § 19.ii. Such notices

will identify a specific location in the Department where interested persons

may inspect the self-certification statements, the published operating

procedures, and any other information

or materials submitted in -connection

with the applications for listing. In addition, within one week after the

listing of a voluntary standards body,

the Secretary will transmit a notice to

all members of the Interagency

Committee on Standards Policy for • transmittal to the heads of their agencies identifying the names of the

listed voluntary standards bodies and

their listed standards-developing groups. The Secretary will also transmit such

information to any other agencies which

indicate a desire to be informed.

(e) Voluntary standards bodies and

their standards-developing groups which

are listed by the Secretary of Commerce

will be eligible for the types of Federal

support defined in paragraph (h) of

§ 19.4. However, the extent of such

support will be subject to the limitation that the granting of Federal support to a voluntary standards activity shall be. limited to that which is clearly in furtherance of an agency’s mission and

responsibility and is compatible with

the agency’s priorities and budget

limitations. Normally, the total amount

of Federal support given shall be no

greater than that of all non-Federal

participants in that activity except

where it is in the direct and

predominant interest of the Federal

Government to develop a needed

standard or revision thereto, and such

development appears unlikely to occur

in the absence of such Federal support

§ 19.8 Delisting process.

(a) Any interested person may

petition the Secretary to remove a voluntary standards body or one or more of its listed standards-developing

groups from the list. Such a petition shall be in writing and shall cite the specific criteria in paragraph (b) of

§ 19.6 which the petitioner believes have

not been met by the body or groups. As

a precondition for a petition to delist, the petitioner shall have exhausted all remedies available within the voluntary

standards body regarding the subject

matter of the petition. All available

supporting documentation and other

relevant information shall be provided

in support of the petition. To the extent

possible, the petition should also provide the names, employment

addresses, and employment telephone

numbers of ail parties materially

involved. Such petitions must be based

on actions or inactions that occurred

after the date that the voluntary

standards body (or a group thereof) is listed by the Secretary. Any such . petition should be addressed to the Secretary of Commerce. U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington.

D.C. 2D230. In addition, the Secretary

may initiate investigations, on the basis

of information received either from

Federal agencies or from other sources, which subsequently may lead to delisting actions pursuant to the procedures of this subpart. If the petition

is directed to a procedural matter, the

Secretary may find it appropriate to advise the petitioner of the existence of

the Department's dispute resolution

service described in subpart B of this Part 19.

(b) The Secretary will evaluate and

act as expeditiously as possible on all petitions for delisting. The Secretary

may request additional information, may

consult with the Department of Justice

and the Federal Trade Commission in evaluating such petitions, and will notify

the petitioner in writing of the decision

reached, after due consideration

whether to process the petition, and the reasons therefor. The Secretary may,

upon finding it appropriate to do so, request all records from a voluntary

standards body that are pertinent to the review of a petition for delisting.

(c) If the Secretary determines that the

petition warrants investigation, the

Secretary will as soon as possible

inform, in writing, the voluntary

standards body concerned of the nature

of the petition. Thereafter, the Secretary

will arrange for an investigation and

notify the voluntary standards body of

its scope. If the Secretary determines

that the petition warrants no further

action, the Secretary will so inform the petitioner in writing, and the reasons

therefor. That determination shall constitute the final review by the Department, unless the petitioner elects within thirty (30) days after receipt of

the Secretary’s notification to request

Departmental reconsideration of that decision by writing to the Secretary of

Commerce. U.S.' Department of Commerce. Washington, D.C. 20230. The

decision of the Secretary on this request

shall constitute the final adminsilrative

review of the executive branch of the Federal Government. (See also § 19.23 of

Subpart B.) This decision would not

prohibit other Federal agencies from

taking separate legal actions under their statutory authorities.

(d) If the investigation pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section indicates

non-compliance with any of the due

process and other basic criteria cited in paragraph (b) of § 19.6. the Secretary

will provide the voluntary standards

body concerned with (1) a statement

indicating the precise nature of the alleged non-compliance, and (2) a copy

of the petition and the identity and

location of all documents, materials, and

other related information submitted with

7.7
37300 Federal Register / Vol. 45. No. 107 / Monday. June 2. 1900 / Proposed Rules

the petition or received or developed

thereafter.

(e) Following receipt of the * information provided by the Secretary in accordance with paragraph (d) of this section, the standards body concerned

shall have sixty (GO) days in which to respond to the statement of alleged noncompliance. If the standards body fails to respond in the sixty (60) day period, or if the Secretary determines that the response received is not persuasive, the Secretary will issue, in writing, to that body and concurrently to the petitioner, a Preliminary Finding of NonCompliance with the specified due

process and other basic criteria identified in paragraph (b) of § 19.6. This

Preliminary Finding of Non-Compliance

will include a description of the corrective action(s) that must be taken

by the body or standards-developing

group concerned in order to qualify for withdrawal of the Preliminary Finding of

Non-Compliance by the Secretary.

(f) If the standards body concerned

does not provide, within sixty (60) days

following receipt of the notification of Preliminary Finding of Non-Compliance,

adequate evidence that the prescribed

corrective action identified in the Preliminary Finding of Non-Compliance

has been taken by that body, or if the Secretary deems that the corrective

action taken is insufficient, the Secretary will issue a Final Finding of Non-Compliance to the body concerned,

and concurrently to the petitioner, if no

hearing has been requested under

paragraph (g) of this section. The

notification of Final Finding of NonCompliance shall constitute notification

of the Department's decision to delist the body or standards-developing group

thereof. Removal of a standardsdeveloping group of a voluntary

standards body will not in itself constitute cause for the removal from

the list of any other groups of that body

or of the body itself, but will result in a change in the listing of a Category A

organization to a Category B

organization.

(g) The Secretary will refrain from

issuing a Final Finding of NonCompliance if the organization

concerned requests a hearing under the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 556 within thirty

(30) days following receipt of the notification of Preliminary Finding of Non-Compliance. A request for a hearing should be addressed to the Secretary of Commerce, U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington.

DC. 20230. In the event of such a request, an Administrative Law Judge

will be designated by the Secretary to conduct a proceeding under 5 U.S.C. 550

and to recommend a decision. At that point in time, the petitioner will be

provided with copies of all papers filed subsequent to the receipt of the petition

for delisting for the purpose of participating in the hearing at the

invitation of the Administrative Law

Judge. Further action on the Preliminary

Finding of Non-Compliance shall be

stayed pending the outcome of that proceeding. The decision of the Secretary following the proceeding will be in writing, will be sent to the organization concerned and to the

petitioner, and will constitute the final administrative action of the executive

branch of Federal Government.

(h) The Secretary will publish in the Federal Register within thirty (30) days

of the decision to issue a Final Finding

of Non-Compliance and delisting

notification, a notice of such a finding

and shall, within one week of such

delisting action, similarly notify in writing the members of the Interagency

Committee on Standards Policy for transmittal to the heads of their agencies, and any other Federal

agencies which indicate a desire to be

notified, as well as the standards body

and the petitioner. The delisting action

resulting from the Final Finding of NonCompliance will become effective thirty

(30) days after the publication of the notice in the Federal Register. Such

Federal Register notice and notification

to Federal agencies will include a statement to the effect that all Federal

executive agencies and their representatives shall cease, as of the

effective date of the delisting action, any

and all participation in or the furnishing

of any other form of support to the delisted body or group thereof, unless

such participation is otherwise required

by law.

(i) The delisting of a voluntary

standards body or a standardsdeveloping group because of the issuance of a Final Finding of NonCompliance against it under paragraph

(f) of this section will lead to early

termination of all Federal agency

support of that voluntary standards

body or group. If the body itself is delisted, such termination will include

cessation of all participation of Federal

agencies in the standards and

standards-related activities of all boards, councils and standards

development committees and groups of

that body.

(j) In order to facilitate termination of

existing Federal agency contracts and

grants with, or the provision of other

support by the Federal agencies to, delisted voluntary standards bodies and

groups. Federal agencies should ensure

that future contracts, grants or other

arrangements involving standards and

standards-related matters, bearing upon

relations between the agencies and

voluntary standards bodies contains a provision which clearly entitles the Federal agency to terminate "for cause

(in contrast to termination “for the convenience of the government ) any

contract, grant, or other arrangement

with a voluntary standards body or group which, during the life of the

'contract, grant, or arrangement becomes . and remains delisted by the Department.

§ 19.9 Voluntary termination of listing. A voluntary standards body may have

its name removed from the list upon its request in writing to the Secretary.

Removal of the name of the voluntary

standards body shall result automatically in removal of all standards-developing groups of that body from the list, without prejudice. In the event that a voluntary standards

body desires to have removed from the

list any of its standards-developing

groups, it may have such groups

removed without prejudice upon written

notification to the Secretary. The

Federal Register notice of such delisting

action and the Department's notice of such action to Federal agencies will state that the delisting action resulted

from a voluntary termination of listing status.

§ 19.10 Reapplication.

If the Department denies an

application for listing, or delists a voluntary standards body (or group

thereof), or if the name of a voluntary

standards body or any standardsdeveloping group is removed from the Department's list as a result of a request

for voluntary termination of such listing, that body may reapply for listing at any

time, with the provision that such

reapplications shall not be accepted or acted upon by the Department more

than once in a period of twelve (12) consecutive months. Such re-application

must conform to the relevant parts of §§ 19.6 and 19.7 and be responsive to the reasons given by the Secretary for denying the earlier application or to the corrective actions identified pursuant to paragraph (e) of § 19.8, or should

indicate, as appropriate, whether the previous delisting action by the Department resulted from a voluntary

termination of listing stutus.

7.8
Federal Register / Vol. 45, No. 107 / Monday. June 2. 19no / Proposed Rules 37381

§§ 19.11-19.20 [Reserved]

Subpart B—Procedures for a Voluntary Dispute Resolution Service

for the Rapid Handling of Procedural

Complaints by Interested Parties

Against Voluntary Standards Bodies

Listed by the Department of

Commerce

§ 19.21 Purpose.

(a) The purpose of this subpart is to establish procedures for the operation of

a Department of Commerce-sponsored

voluntary dispute resolution service

regarding procedural complaints by

interested parties against voluntary

standards bodies, as specified in OMB

Circular A-119 (“Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary

Standards,” issued January 17, 1980 (45 F.R. 4326, January 21. 1980). This dispute

resolution service is designed to implement that Circular’s section 7a(6)

which requires the Secretary of

Commerce to: "Establish a program which shall make

available a department-sponsored voluntary

dispute resolution service for the rapid

handling of procedural complaints by

interested parties against listed voluntary standards bodies. As a precondition to invoking that service, a complainant must

seek relief from, and have exhausted ail available sources of remedy within, the affected voluntary standards body. Such a . service shall have, among its requirements,

the agreement of both complainant and

respondent to use the service and their consent to accept the determinations of the service as the sole and final administrative review by the executive branch.”

(b) Nothing in these procedures shall be interpreted as providing any party

with an opportunity to unreasonably

delay, inhibit, or otherwise interfere with the normal and lawful process of voluntary standardization, or any action

available under the law with regard to any matter involving the establishment

or use of the voluntary standards.

(c) These procedures will not be used

to resolve any complaints which are based upon the provisions in Section 441

of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979.

§ 19.22 Objective of procedures.

(a) The objective of these dispute

resolution service procedures is to facilitate the timely resolution of complaints pertaining to procedural

errors allegedly committed by listed voluntary standards bodies.

§ 19.23 Definitions.

(a) Department means the U.S. Department of Commerce.

(b) Secretary means the Secretary of

Commerce or the Secretary’s designee.

(c) Interested party means an

individual, government agency,

association, company, corporation, firm,

partnership, or other organization

named or admitted as a party, or properly seeking and entitled as of right

to be admitted as a party to a proceeding under these procedures, due

to allegations of procedural error(s)

having been committed.

(d) Complainant means an interested

party as defined in paragraph (c) of this section who has submitted a complaint

to the Secretary under these procedures.

(e) Standard means a prescribed set of

rules, conditions, or requirements

concerned with: the definition of terms;

classification of components;

delineation of procedures; specification

of materials, performance, design, or operations; or measurement of quality

and quantity in describing materials,

products, systems, services or practices.

(f) Voluntary standards are established generally by private sector bodies and are available for use by any

person or organization, private or governmental. The term includes what

are commonly referred to as "industry

standards” as well as “consensus

standards” but does not include

professional standards of personal

conduct, private standards of individual

firms, or standards mandated by law,

such as those contained in the United

States Pharmacopeia and the National

Formulary, as referenced in 21 U.S.C.

351.

(g) Voluntary standards bodies means

nongovernmental bodies which are broadly-based, multi-membered

organizations, including, for example,

nonprofit organizations, industry

associations, and professional and/or

technical societies which develop,

establish, or coordinate voluntary

standards.

(h) Standards-developing groups means committees, boards, or any other

principal subdivision of voluntary

standards bodies, established by such

bodies for the purpose of developing,

revising, or reviewing standards and

which are bound by the procedures of

those bodies.

(i) Procedural complaint refers to a complaint which relates to the procedural aspects of the standards

development and/or review and/or

approval process. It excludes complaints

relating to substantive aspects of a standard such as, for example, the level of performance selected by the standards developing group for a particular component. Accordingly, a procedural complaint means a complaint

that alleges denial of any of the due

process and other basic criteria of Section 6c of the Circular or of

paragraph (b) of § 19.8 of the Department of Commerce’s “Procedures

for Listing and Delisting Voluntary

Standards Bodies and Their Groups” (15 C.F.R. Part 19, Subpart A) in the development, review, or approval of

standards or refusal to develop new or revised standards as well as a complaint that alleges denial of any

other standards development and/or

review and/or approval procedure

established by the voluntary standards

body or group concerned.

(j) Circular means OMB Circular A119 entitled "Federal Participation in the

Development and Use of Voluntary

Standards," dated January 17, 1980 and

effective on that date.

(k) List or listed means a compilation

of voluntary standards bodies and

standards-developing groups thereof

which have been accepted by the Secretary as complying with the due

process and other basic criteria cited in Section 6c of the Circular and of the

Department of Commerce's "Procedures

for Listing and Delisting Voluntary

Standards Bodies and Their Groups” (15

C.F.R. Part 19, Subpart A).

(l) Sole andfinal administrative

review by the executive branch means

that once a complaint has been

processed under this subpart no Federal

executive branch agency shall have any

obligation to give any further administrative review to that complaint,

except as otherwise may be provided by

law. The term should not be interpreted

to affect any subsequent judicial or

quasi-judicial review of the complaint or review for law enforcement purposes as,

for example, by a court of law or by the Federal Trade Commission or the

Department of Justice. Additionally, this term should not be interpreted as preventing the Department from

considering a petition for delisting under

§ 19.8 of subpart A. Nor should this term

be interpreted as obligating any party to implement any recommendations made

by the representative of the Secretary

(pursuant to the conciliation process) or

the mediator, if any, under these

procedures.

(m) Due process and other basic

criteria has reference to requirements

described in section 6c of the Circular, as supplemented by paragraph (b) of

§ 19.6 of the Department's "Procedures

for Listing and Delisting Voluntary

Standards Bodies and Their Groups" (15

CFR. Part 19. Subpart A).

(n) Final cction with respect to the development of voluntary standards means the concluding step m the development and approval of such

standards by the voluntary standards

body in accordance with the published

procedures of that body. Final action

7.9
37382 Federal Register / Vol. 45, No. 10^ / Monday, June 2. 1900 / Proposed Rules

with respect to the approval or disapproval of a request for a new or

revised standard means the final decision by the voluntary standards

body on such a request.

9 19-24 Precondition to submitting

complaint

Prior to submitting a complaint under

these procedures, the complainant must

have sought relief from and have

exhausted all remedies available within

the concerned voluntary standards

body.

9 19.25 Limitation. The Department will not process any

complaint where the final action on the provisions in question was taken by the voluntary standards body concerned

before the effective date of these

procedures.

9 19.26 Submitting a complaint

(a) Any interested party may request

the Department to process a procedural,

complaint under this subpart. Such a

request must be written and sent to the Secretary of Commerce. U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington,

D.C. 20230. All requests shall:

(1) identify the standard(s). proposed

standard(s). and the procedures of the

voluntary standards body involved:

(2) describe fully the nature of the complaint including, to the extent known, the positions of any other

parties in interest who are or may

become, directly or indirectly, affected

by the matter which is the subject of the complaint. In such cases the complainant shall, where possible,

provide the name, employment address,

standards group affiliation, and

employment telephone number of each

such party;

(3) describe fully any previous

attempts made to resolve the complaint,

including appeals within the voluntary

standards body, and the results of those

attempts;.

(4) describe in as specific terms as

possible the consequences to the complainant of the non-resolution of the complaint to complainant's satisfaction:

(5) indicate agreement to accept the determination by the dispute resolution

service as the sole and final administrative review of the complaint

by the executive branch: and

(6) provide any other available and

pertinent supporing information.

(b) In addition to taking action under

5 19.27 the Secretary will determine

whether the complaint warrants

investigation under the provisions for

delisting in paragraph (a) § 19.&of

subpart A.

§ 19.27 Action upon receipt of complaint

(a) The Secretary will evaluate the complaint together with the supporting

information received. The Secretary will seek information regarding the complaint from the voluntary standards

body involved and will solicit the agreement of that body, as well as the complainant, to use this dispute ' resolution service and to accept the determination by that service as the sole and final administrative review of the complaint by the executive branch. If. either party does not agree to utilize the dispute resolution service, there shall be no further action taken by the Department.

(b) The Secretary may request

additional information, if needed, from

the involved parties.

(c) When in the opinion of the Secretary the complainant's submission

of information required by § 19.26 is complete, the Secretary may: (1) determine that the complaint merits • processing under these procedures, or

(2) decline to accept the complaint in which case the Secretary shall indicate

in writing to the complainant the reasons for so declining. Such

declinations may be expected to occur

in cases, for example: where, in the judgement of the Secretary based on the information submitted and obtained, it is unlikely that processing under these

procedures will make a significant

contribution to the successful resolution

of the complaint: where the complaint is not "procedural' within the scope of this service; where the voluntary standards

body concerned refuses to agree to use

the service or to consent to accept the determinations by the service as the sole and final administrative review by

the executive branch: or where, in the discretion of the Secretary, the subject

of the complaint is a matter which

should be directed to the Department of

Justice or the Federal Trade

Commission. The complainant may

resubmit a complaint to the Department

of Commerce if, after directing it to the Department of Justice or the Federal

Trade Commission, such agencies

decide not to take any action. In the event of a declination by the Secretary

to accept a complaint, the complainant

may make a written request for departmental reconsideration to the Secretary of Commerce. U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington.

D.C. 20230. within 30 (thirty) days of

receipt of the declination. The decision

of the Secretary on such a request shall be final. (d) A complainant whoso complaint was not accepted by the Department

may resubmit the complaint for

processing by the Department whenever

the complainant has new information or evidence of a significant nature. In resubmitting the complaint, the complainant must clearly identify the nature of the new information or evidence and how It relates to the reasons previously given for not accepting the complaint.

(e) If the Department accepts a complaint for processing under these

procedures, the Secretary will so inform

the complainant and the respondent

voluntary standards body in writing.

The Secretary may request copies of any

relevant records, including the appeal

record, from the voluntary standards

body concerned. The Secretary's letters

to the complainant and respondent

standards body concerned will indicate

that the dispute resolution service

involves a two step procedure. The first step consists of an informal

investigation/conciliation process as set forth in § 19.29 of these procedures. If this investigation/conciliation process is unsuccessful and if both the complainant and voluntary standards

body agree, a mediator or mediation

panel may be appointed in accordance

with § 19.30 of these procedures, as the second and final step of this procedure.

§ 19.28 Responsibilities of complainant

and respondent if a complaint is accepted

by the Department

If the Department accepts a complaint

for processing under these procedures,

the complainant and the respondent

voluntary standards body shall: (a) cooperate fully and in good faith with

the Department the mediator (if any),

and other parties involved to reach a mutually acceptable resolution of the complaint in a timely fashion: (b) provide, upon request by the Secretary,

additional and available pertinent data

or other information, except that there

shall be no requirement to furnish

proprietary information: (c) promptly

inform the Department or mediator, as

appropriate, regarding pertinent events

or actions taken by the complainant or

the voluntary standards body concerned

which occur during the processing by

the dispute resolution service but which

occur without the Department's direct

involvement or knowledge, and (d) inform the Department, upon request, of

any action taken pursuant to recommendations, if any, of the Secretary made under this service.

§ 19.29 Investigation/conciJIation.

(a) If Lhe Department accepts a complaint under these procedures, the Secretary will designate a qualified

representative who shall perform

investigation and conciliation functions.

7.10
Federal Register 37383 /

including consultations with the complainant, the respondent voluntary

standards body, and any other parties

involved in an effort to clarify the areas

of disagreement, and attempt to effect a mutually acceptable resolution of such

areas within a two-month period

following the representative's

appointment. The Secretary's

representative may seek assistance from

any appropriate source. Such assistance,

if any, may be provided on a reimbursable basis.

(b) At any appropriate point in the

investigation/conciliation process the Secretary’s representative may make

recommendations to the party(ies)

which appear to reflect a reasonable

resolution of any or all of the areas of

disagreement. The parties involved

should consider those recommendations

in good faith.

(c) If the parties reach a mutually

acceptable agreement during the

conciliation process, the Secretary's

representative will record the specific nature of that agreement and will transmit copies of that record to the

parties involved. If no agreement is reached, or if a partial conciliation is reached, the representative will record

such results, including any issues which

remain in disagreement, and will transmit a copy of that record to the

parties. Copies of all documents

prepared in these proceedings will, . without unreasonable delay, be filed with the Secretary.

(d) In the event that the investigation/

conciliation effort does not resolve all areas of disagreement, the representative, in transmitting the copy . of the investigation/conciliation record

to the parties, will inform the parties of

their prerogative of requesting a mediator or mediation panel under these

procedures.

§ 19.30 Mediation.

(a) If pursuant to paragraph (d) of

§ 19.29, both parties indicate to the Secretary in writing that'thev desire a mediator or mediation panel, and if the Secretary believes that mediation may

resolve the areas of disagreement, the Secretary may appoint a mediator or mediation panel in a further attempt to resolve the complaint. Selection of a mediator or mediation panel may be

accomplished in consultation with the Federal Mediation and Conciliation

Service. The mediator(s) so appointed

may be an employec(s) of the Federal

Mediation and Conciliation Service,

another Federal agency, individuals

from the private sector, or other source, but shall not be employees of the Department of Commerce. The services

of the mediator(s) may be subject to

Vol. 45. No. 107 / Monday, June 2. 1900 / Proposed Rules

contract, which may include provisions

for necessary clerical and other support

costs. An effort will be made by the Secretary to secure a mcdiator(s) who

will be acceptable to the parties

involved and who will avoid the appearance of a "conflict of interest"

situation with respect to the subject matter and the parties involved in the

dispute.

(b) The Secretary will provide the

mediator(s) with the record of the

investigation/conciliation process which

shall identify all remaining areas of

disagreement, including the positions of

the parties on each such remaining area, and will transmit or otherwise, make . available to the mediator(s) all other

available information pertinent to the resolution of the identified areas of

disagreement. The Secretary’s letter of

appointment will also specify a target

date for the completion of mediation;

such date generally will be not more

than three months from the date of the

* appointment of the mediator(s).

(c) At the start of the mediation

process, the mediator(s) will encourage

the parties to agree in advance to be

bound by the agreements reached during

the mediation process. If such agreement

from the parties is forthcoming, the

mediator(s) will record such agreement

and shall inform the Secretary

accordingly.

(d) The mediator(s) will endeavor

forthwith and within the designated

time frame to facilitate a mutually

acceptable resolution of the remaining

areas of disagreement identified by the Secretary. In so doing, the mediator(s)

may hold meetings, may communicate

with each party on an individual or group basis, and may utilize any other

reasonable lawful means, including

technical assistance, to resolve the areas of disagreement. Such technical*

assistance may be provided on a reimbursable basis.

(e) The Secretary may, for good and

sufficient reasons, grant one extension

of time for completion of mediation

pursuant to the written request by the mediator(s). Such a request shall specify

the reasons for the requested extension.

Any extension generally 3hall be limited

to a maximum of two months.

(f) If. during the mediation process,

the parties reach agreement on all the areas of disagreement identified by the Secretary, the mediator(s) will record

the nature of the agreement for each

area, have each party sign and date the agreement, and will transmit copies of

that record to the Secretary and to the

parties.

(g) If the time period (including any

extension provided] for mediation

expires with one or more areas of

disagreement still remaining, the "mediators) will terminate the rpediation

process and will record the areas of

agreement (if any). With regard to each

of the remaining areas of disagreement,

the mediator(s) will record the specific nature of such disagreement and make a

factual report of the mediation process. The report will be transmitted by the

mediator(s) to the Secretary and to the

parties involved. The report will not

contain any information which was

submitted to the mediator in confidence.

(h) Upon receipt of the report from the

mediator(s), the Secretary, in appropriate cases, may develop and

transmit to the involved parties

recommendations to resolve the areas of

disagreement. Such recommendations

may include the submission of the unresolved issues on areas of

disagreement to arbitration.

§ 19231 Publication and records.

(a) The Secretary will cause to be

published in the Federal Register, at

least annually, a summary of each of the cases processed under these procedures,

including any recommendations made

by the Secretary to resolve any

remaining issues, unless the parties in any case agree in writing that the dispute has been amicably resolved to

their mutual satisfaction, and that agreement is filed with the Secretary.

(b) The Secretary will keep a record of

each complaint received, including the

action taken, if any, by the parties as a

result of this dispute resolution service.

§ 19232 Technical referee service. Nothing in these procedures shall be

construed to inhibit any party from

directly seeking, on its own initiative and at any time, the technical referee

services of the National Bureau of

Standards regarding methods of

measurement, test results, and

interpretation of test results in accordance with Title 15, CFR. Part

200.103.

§§ 19.33-19.40 [Reserved]

|FR Doc. 80-16W4 Piled 5-30-80: 8:« *1111 8ILUNG COD£ 3510-13-M

7.11

NBS-114A (REV. a-78)

U.S. DEPT. OF COMM.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA

SHEET

1. PUBLICATION OR REPORT NO. NBSIR 80-2201

2-Gcv^L Accession No.

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

"Coordinated Measurement Services at the

National Bureau of Standards"

3. fteetsteftt' s. Accession No.

5. Publication Date December 1980

6. Performing Organi zation Cede

;> iSs, -. ;

7. AUTHOR(S)

A. McCoubrey, A. Tholen, B. Belanger, D. Edgerly

8. Performing Organ. Report No.

Unit No.

. S

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

WASHINGTON, DC 20234

11. Contract/Grant No.

12. SPONSORING ORGANIZATION NAME AND COMPLETE ADDRESS (Street, City, state, ZIP)

Directorate of Measurement Services (510)

Physics A-363

13. Type of Report & Period Covered

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

| | Document describes a computer program; SF-185, FIPS Software Summary, is attached.

16. ABSTRACT (A 200-word or leas factual summary of most significant information. If document includes a significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here,) The document provides an overview of the coordinating activities of the

Directorate of Measurement Services as they are required to meet the needs

of industry, State and local governments, and other Federal agencies.

Critical issues are identified, accomplishments are highlighted, and plans

for program development are reviewed.

17. KEY WORDS (s ix to twelve entries; alphabetical order; capitalize only the fir3t letter of the first key word unless a proper name;

separated by semicolons)

Calibrations; International standards; Measurement Assurance Programs (MAP's);

Measurement services; OIML; Voluntary standards; Weights and measures.

18. AVAILABILITY Unlimited 19. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS REPORT)

21. NO. OF

PRINTED PAGES

j~X| For Official Distribution. Do Not Release to NTIS UNCLASSIFIED

1 Order From Sup. of Doc., U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC

20402, SD Stock No. SN003-003-

20. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS PAGE)

22. Price

j Order From National Technical Information Service (NTIS), Springfield,

VA. 22161 UNCLASSIFIED

USCOMM-DC

ii